Alosetron versus traditional pharmacotherapy in clinical practice: effects on resource use, health-related quality of life, safety and symptom improvement in women with severe diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome

An evidence-based update on the diagnosis and management of irritable bowel syndrome

INTRODUCTION

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a disorder of gut-brain interaction affecting 5% of the population. The cardinal symptoms are abdominal pain and altered stool form or frequency.

AREAS COVERED

Diagnosis and management of IBS. We searched the literature for diagnostic accuracy studies, randomized controlled trials, and meta-analyses. A positive diagnosis of IBS, alongside testing to exclude celiac disease, is recommended. Exhaustive investigation has a low yield. Patients should be offered traditional dietary advice. If response is incomplete, specialist dietetic guidance should be considered. Probiotics may be beneficial, but quality of evidence is poor. First-line treatment of constipation is with laxatives, with secretagogues used where these are ineffective. Anti-diarrheal drugs should be used first-line for diarrhea, with second-line drugs including 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 antagonists, eluxadoline, or rifaximin, where available. First-line treatment of abdominal pain should be with antispasmodics, with gut-brain neuromodulators prescribed second-line. Low-dose tricyclic antidepressants, such as amitriptyline, are preferred. Brain-gut behavioral therapies are effective and have evidence for efficacy in patients refractory to standard therapies.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite substantial advances, there remains scope for improvement in terms of both the diagnosis and management of IBS. Reinforcement of positive diagnostic strategies for the condition and novel treatment paradigms are required.

Pharmacokinetic considerations for drugs that treat diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome: what's new?

INTRODUCTION

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), which presents a significant healthcare and socioeconomic burden, is one of the main issues in the field of therapy. Hence, it is imperative to tackle this matter by evaluating the safety and efficacy of the available treatments and determining the ideal approach for each patient.

AREAS COVERED

We reviewed the pharmacokinetics and safety of pharmacologic interventions administered in diarrhea-predominant IBS (IBS-D) patients. PubMed, Google Scholar and the USFDA databases were searched up to November 2023 to include all updated information on eluxadoline, alosetron, and rifaximin.

EXPERT OPINION

The most effective way to treat IBS-D is to focus on managing the most common symptoms. However, healthcare providers face a challenge when it comes to identifying the right treatment for each patient, and the root cause of this is the diversity of IBS-D population. Studies have shown that there are differences in how men and women metabolize drugs, which may lead to gender-specific adverse reactions. Women tend to have higher drug concentrations in their bloodstream and take longer to eliminate them. Therefore, healthcare providers may need to reduce the dosage for female patients. Integrating IBS care into sustainable development efforts can indirectly contribute to achieving SDGs and promote health and well-being for all.

Drugs of the future for diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome: an overview of current investigational drugs

INTRODUCTION

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) has a significant impact on society and quality of life. Current treatments are ineffective, and new investigational drugs are necessary.

AREAS COVERED

Numerous potential therapies are developing, targeting different areas such as cannabinoid signaling, opioid receptors, tachykinin (NK2) receptors, β3-adrenergic receptors, intestinal microbiota, inflammation, and 5HT receptors. Clinical trial evidence has shown that loperamide, eluxadoline, alosetron, ramosetron, bile acid sequestrants, and rifaximin can modulate GI alterations and benefit patients with IBS-D. Among the potential therapies, ibodutant, ibudilast, blautix, BOS-589, solabegron, vibegron, olorinab, ebastine, and ORP-101 have demonstrated possible effects but remain confirmed.

EXPERT OPINION

Individuals with IBS-D require cost-effective treatment options that do not impede their productivity or that of their caregivers. This is necessary for consistent healthcare and improved quality of life. Therefore, we should focus on developing new, efficient, and affordable medications for IBS-D. The government, insurers, and society must recognize this need and collaborate to ensure its fulfillment.

Irritable bowel syndrome - less irritable, or better treatments?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a chronic, often bothersome disorder of gut-brain interaction (DGBI) characterized by abdominal pain associated with a change in stool frequency and/or caliber. Recent advancements have improved our understanding of the underlying pathophysiology, thus opening new avenues for therapeutic intervention. The purpose of this review is to summarize the current literature regarding treatment modalities for IBS.

RECENT FINDINGS

Altering the gut microbiome via probiotic and antibiotic administration, avoiding dietary triggers, and modulating the gut-brain axis have all proven efficacious for the management of IBS symptoms. Several gut-specific pharmacotherapies are approved for the treatment of IBS, many of which primarily address either diarrhea or constipation, although many patients remain symptomatic despite appropriate use. Brain-gut behavioral therapies (BGBTs) are increasingly used to treat symptoms of IBS, particularly in those who do not respond to traditional therapies. Virtual reality represents an exciting new approach to treating DGBIs, like IBS, though data are limited.

SUMMARY

As our understanding of IBS continues to evolve, so should our therapeutic approach. Individualizing the therapeutic approach is of utmost importance.

Randomised, placebo-controlled trial and meta-analysis show benefit of ondansetron for irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhoea: The TRITON trial

BACKGROUND

Ondansetron may be beneficial in irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhoea (IBS-D).

AIM

To conduct a 12-week parallel group, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of ondansetron 4 mg o.d. (titrated up to 8 mg t.d.s.) in 400 IBS-D patients.

PRIMARY ENDPOINT

% responders using the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) composite endpoint. Secondary and mechanistic endpoints included stool consistency (Bristol Stool Form Scale) and whole gut transit time (WGTT). After literature review, results were pooled with other placebo-controlled trials in a meta-analysis to estimate relative risks (RR), 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and number needed to treat (NNT).

RESULTS

Eighty patients were randomised. On intention-to-treat analysis, 15/37 (40.5%; 95% CI 24.7%-56.4%) met the primary endpoint on ondansetron versus 12/43 (27.9%; 95% CI 14.5%-41.3%) on placebo (p = 0.19). Ondansetron improved stool consistency compared with placebo (adjusted mean difference - 0.7; 95% CI -1.0 to-0.3, p < 0.001). Ondansetron increased WGTT between baseline and week 12 (mean (SD) difference 3.8 (9.1) hours, versus placebo -2.2 (10.3) hours, p = 0.01). Meta-analysis of 327 patients from this, and two similar trials, demonstrated ondansetron was superior to placebo for the FDA composite endpoint (RR of symptoms not responding = 0.86; 95% CI 0.75-0.98, NNT = 9) and stool response (RR = 0.65; 95% CI 0.52-0.82, NNT = 5), but not abdominal pain response (RR = 0.95; 95% CI 0.74-1.20).

CONCLUSIONS

Although small numbers meant the primary endpoint was not met in this trial, when pooled with other similar trials meta-analysis suggests ondansetron improves stool consistency and reduces days with loose stool and urgency. Trial registration - http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN17508514.

Measuring, Analyzing, and Presenting Work Productivity Loss in Randomized Controlled Trials: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to conduct a scoping review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and investigate which work productivity loss outcomes were measured in these RCTs, how each outcome was measured and analyzed, and how the results for each outcome were presented.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted from January 2010 to April 2020 from 2 databases: PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Data on country, study population, disease focus, sample size, work productivity loss outcomes measured (absenteeism, presenteeism, employment status changes), and methods used to measure, report, and analyze each work productivity loss outcome were extracted and analyzed.

RESULTS

We found 435 studies measuring absenteeism or presenteeism, of which 155 studies (35.6%) measured both absenteeism and presenteeism and were included in our final review. Only 9 studies also measured employment status changes. The most used questionnaire was the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire. The analysis of absenteeism and presenteeism data was mostly done using regression models (n = 98, n = 98, respectively) for which a normal distribution was assumed (n = 77, n = 89, respectively). Absenteeism results were most often presented in time whereas presenteeism was commonly presented using a percent scale or score.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a lack of consensus on how to measure, analyze, and present work productivity loss outcomes in RCTs published in the past 10 years. The diversity of measurement, analysis, and presentation methods used in RCTs may make comparability challenging. There is a need for guidelines providing recommendations to standardize the comprehensiveness and the appropriateness of methods used to measure, analyze, and report work productivity loss in RCTs.

Pharmacological Therapies and Their Clinical Targets in Irritable Bowel Syndrome With Diarrhea

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is one of the most common disorders of the gut-brain axis, which affects approximately 4% of the global population. The Rome IV criteria define IBS as chronic or recurrent abdominal pain associated with altered bowel habits. Patients can be categorized in four subtypes: IBS with predominant constipation (IBS-C), predominant diarrhea (IBS-D), mixed bowel habits (IBS-M), and unclassified (IBS-U). IBS is associated with a lower quality of life, reduced work productivity, and high healthcare costs. When comparing subtypes, patients with IBS-D report lower disease related quality of life. Due to the scope of this review, we have solely focused on patients with IBS-D. Choosing the right pharmacological treatment in these patients remains challenging due to the heterogeneous patient population, patients' expectation of the treatment outcome, unavailability of efficacious drugs, and the multifactorial and incompletely understood underlying pathophysiology. Currently, pharmacological treatment options target individual symptoms, such as abdominal pain, altered bowel habits, and bloating. In this review, we aimed to summarize the current and recent pharmacological treatment options in IBS-D, targeting the predominant gastrointestinal symptoms. Additionally, we proposed a pharmacological treatment algorithm which healthcare professionals could use when treating individual patients with IBS-D.

Recent advances in diagnosis and management of irritable bowel syndrome

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review summarizes recent progress in the diagnosis and management of irritable bowel syndrome, with a focus on dietary and microbiota aspects.

RECENT FINDINGS

From a pathophysiological point of view, IBS is a multifactorial condition with both peripheral (transit) as central (visceral hypersensitivity, anxiety, depression) contribution in a cumulative fashion to the symptom pattern and severity. More recently, the focus has shifted to diet and microbiota. The number of dietary options that can be used for IBS and the understanding of determinants of their efficacy is rapidly increasing. Several studies have confirmed the efficacy of the low fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides and polyols (FODMAP) diet. Sucrose-isomaltase deficiency has emerged as pathogenetic mechanisms in a subset of patients, who do not respond to low FODMAP diet but may respond to starch and sucrose elimination. Herbal remedies, probiotics and secretagogues have been the topic of additional treatment trials. The efficacy of fecal microbiota transplantation in IBS is variable across studies, but donor selection is emerging as a critical factor.

SUMMARY

Irritable bowel syndrome has evolved into a disorder of interaction between dietary factors and gut microbiota, with impact on bowel symptoms as well as extra-intestinal, central, symptoms. Dietary adjustments and treatments targeting the gut microbiota are areas of active research and clinical progress.

How Serotonin Level Fluctuation Affects the Effectiveness of Treatment in Irritable Bowel Syndrome

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is one of the most commonly diagnosed functional gastrointestinal (GI) disorders. It affects both men and women. Enteric serotonin (5HT) is responsible for gut motility, secretion, visceral hypersensitivity, and inflammation. The serotonin reuptake transporter (SERT) maintains serotonin levels by regulating its reuptake. An increase in SERT expression causes a decrease in serotonin, which leads to IBS-C (irritable bowel syndrome, constipation-predominant), whereas a decrease in SERT transcription causes an increase in serotonin, which leads to IBS-D (irritable bowel syndrome, diarrhea-predominant). Some factors can alter SERT transcription, such as certain bacteria, inflammation, growth factor, and glucagon-like peptide-1. This shows that 5HT and SERT both have an important role in IBS pathophysiology so that it would be a better subject to target for the treatment aspect of IBS. 5HT3 receptor antagonists are advisable for IBS-D to block the excessive activity of serotonin at the 5HT3 receptor and reduce gut motility. For IBS-C, we prescribe 5HT4 receptor agonists, which promote gut motility. Also, the latest treatment approach, antidepressant drugs TCAs (tricyclic antidepressants) and SSRIs (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors), are helpful by modulating serotonin levels in the gut. In this literature review, we found that serotonin is one of the main pathophysiological factors for IBS, and we can treat IBS by targeting serotonin function on gut motility.

An update on efficacy and safety considerations for the latest drugs used to treat irritable bowel syndrome

INTRODUCTION

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), globally affecting 11.2% of the population and imposing a direct annual cost of $1.7bn-$10bn in the US, is one of the today's major therapeutic challenges. Therefore, there is urgent need to address this issue through reviewing the tolerability and efficacy of available medications.

AREAS COVERED

Over the past decade, related experiments were cited through Clinicaltrials.gov, PubMed, WHO ICTRP, and Cochrane library. Pharmacological parameters of approved medications available in the USFDA, EMA, TGA and PMDA were also stated.

EXPERT OPINION

Anti-spasmodics are used as the first-line treatment in pain-predominant IBS and IBS-D, among which calcium channel blockers and neurokinin-type 2 receptor antagonists seem to replace anti-cholinergic drugs. As second-line treatments, rifaximin is considered to be the best for IBS-D though it has lower efficacy than alosetron and eluxadoline. For IBS-C, linaclotide is the most effective and the safest second-line therapy, following laxatives/fibers, which may be replaced by tenapanor, in the future. When moderate to severe IBS is associated with severe pain or comorbid psychological disorders, gut-brain neuromodulators could also be prescribed. Regarding all this, there is still a paramount need to conduct careful clinical studies on efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of current approved and non-approved treatments.

Best management of irritable bowel syndrome

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a common disorder of gut-brain interaction which can have a considerable impact on quality of life. Following diagnosis, timely and evidence-based management is vital to the care of patients with IBS, aiming to improve outcomes, and enhance patient satisfaction. Good communication is paramount, and clinicians should provide a clear explanation about the disorder, with a focus on exploring the patient's own beliefs about IBS, and a discussion of any concerns they may have. It should be emphasised that symptoms are often chronic, and that treatment, while aiming to improve symptoms, may not relieve them completely. Initial management should include simple lifestyle and dietary advice, discussion of the possible benefit of some probiotics, and, if this is unsuccessful, patients can be referred to a dietician for consideration of a low FODMAP (fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides and polyols) diet. Antispasmodics and peppermint oil can be used first-line for the treatment of abdominal pain. If patients fail to respond, central neuromodulators can be used second-line; tricyclic antidepressants should be preferred. Loperamide and laxatives can be used first-line for treating diarrhoea and constipation, respectively. Patients with constipation who fail to respond to laxatives should be offered a trial of linaclotide. For patients with diarrhoea, the 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor agonists alosetron and ramosetron appear to be the most effective second-line drugs. Where these are unavailable, ondansetron is a reasonable alternative. If medical treatment is unsuccessful, patients should be referred for psychological therapy, where available, if they are amenable to this. Cognitive behavioural therapy and gut-directed hypnotherapy are the psychological therapies with the largest evidence base.

Efficacy of pharmacological therapies in patients with IBS with diarrhoea or mixed stool pattern: systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Over half of patients with IBS have either diarrhoea (IBS-D) or a mixed stool pattern (IBS-M). The relative efficacy of licenced pharmacological therapies is unclear in the absence of head-to-head trials. We conducted a network meta-analysis to resolve this uncertainty.

DESIGN

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Embase Classic, the Cochrane central register of controlled trials, and Clinicaltrials.gov through January 2019 to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy of licenced pharmacological therapies (alosetron, eluxadoline, ramosetron and rifaximin) in adults with IBS-D or IBS-M. Trials included in the analysis reported a dichotomous assessment of overall response to therapy, and data were pooled using a random effects model. Efficacy and safety of all pharmacological therapies were reported as a pooled relative risk with 95% CIs to summarise the effect of each comparison tested. Treatments were ranked according to their p score.

RESULTS

We identified 18 eligible RCTs (seven alosetron, five ramosetron, two rifaximin and four eluxadoline), containing 9844 patients. All were superior to placebo for the treatment of IBS-D or IBS-M at 12 weeks, according to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-recommended endpoint for trials in IBS. Alosetron 1 mg twice daily was ranked first for efficacy, based on the FDA-recommended composite endpoint of improvement in both abdominal pain and stool consistency, effect on global symptoms of IBS and effect on stool consistency. Ramosetron 2.5µg once daily was ranked first for effect on abdominal pain. Total numbers of adverse events were significantly greater with alosetron 1 mg twice daily and ramosetron 2.5µg once daily, compared with placebo. Rifaximin 550 mg three times daily ranked first for safety. Constipation was significantly more common with all drugs, except rifaximin 550 mg three times daily.

CONCLUSION

In a network meta-analysis of RCTs of pharmacological therapies for IBS-D and IBS-M, we found all drugs to be superior to placebo, but alosetron and ramosetron appeared to be the most effective.