Risk of postoperative infectious complications from medical therapies in inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND

Medications used to treat inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have significantly improved patient outcomes and delayed time to surgery. However, some of these therapies are recognized to increase the general risk of infection and have an unclear impact on postoperative infection risk.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the impact of perioperative IBD medications on the risk of postoperative infections within 30 days of surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane IBD Group's Specialized Register (29 October 2019), MEDLINE (January 1966 to October 2019), Embase (January 1985 to October 2019), the Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from inception up to October 2019, and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials, quasi-randomized controlled trials, non-randomized controlled trials, prospective cohort studies, retrospective cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies comparing participants treated with an IBD medication preoperatively or within 30 days postoperatively to those who were not taking that medication (either another active medication, placebo, or no treatment). We included published study reports and abstracts.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts and extracted data. The primary outcome was postoperative infection within 30 days of surgery. Secondary outcomes included incisional infections and wound dehiscence, intra-abdominal infectious complications and extra-abdominal infections. Three review authors assessed risks of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. We contacted authors for additional information when data were missing. For the primary and secondary outcomes, we calculated odds ratios (ORs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) using the generic inverse variance method. When applicable, we analyzed adjusted and unadjusted data separately. We evaluated the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 68 observational cohort studies (total number of participants unknown because some studies did not report the number of participants). Of these, 48 studies reported including participants with Crohn's disease, 36 reported including participants with ulcerative colitis and five reported including participants with indeterminate colitis. All 42 studies that reported urgency of surgery included elective surgeries, with 31 (74%) of those also including emergency surgeries. Twenty-four studies had low risk of bias while the rest had very high risk. Based on pooling of adjusted data, we calculated ORs for postoperative total infection rates in participants who received corticosteroids (OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.38 to 2.09; low-certainty evidence), immunomodulators (OR 1.29, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.76; low-certainty evidence), anti-TNF agents (OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.20 to 2.13; very low-certainty evidence) and anti-integrin agents (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.36; low-certainty evidence). We pooled unadjusted data to assess postoperative total infection rates for the use of aminosalicylates (5-ASA) (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.14; very low-certainty evidence). One secondary outcome examined was wound-related complications in participants using: corticosteroids (OR 1.41, 95% CI 0.72 to 2.74; very low-certainty evidence), immunomodulators (OR 1.35, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.89; very low-certainty evidence), anti-TNF agents (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.68; very low-certainty evidence) and anti-integrin agents (OR 1.64, 95% CI 0.77 to 3.50; very low-certainty evidence) compared to controls. Another secondary outcome examined the odds of postoperative intra-abdominal infections in participants using: corticosteroids (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.84; very low-certainty evidence), 5-ASA (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.33; very low-certainty evidence), immunomodulators (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.12; very low-certainty evidence), anti-TNF agents (OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.82; very low-certainty evidence) and anti-integrin agents (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.20; very low-certainty evidence) compared to controls. Lastly we checked the odds for extra-abdominal infections in participants using: corticosteroids (OR 1.23, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.55; very low-certainty evidence), immunomodulators (OR 1.17, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.71; very low-certainty evidence), anti-TNF agents (OR 1.34, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.87; very low-certainty evidence) and anti-integrin agents (OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.43 to 3.08; very low-certainty evidence) compared to controls.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence for corticosteroids, 5-ASA, immunomodulators, anti-TNF medications and anti-integrin medications was of low or very low certainty. The impact of these medications on postoperative infectious complications is uncertain and we can draw no firm conclusions about their safety in the perioperative period. Decisions on preoperative IBD medications should be tailored to each person's unique circumstances. Future studies should focus on controlling for potential confounding factors to generate higher-quality evidence.

Effects and treatment of inflammatory bowel disease during pregnancy

QUESTION

I have several patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) who are pregnant or planning pregnancies. What information can I give them regarding the possible effects of IBD on pregnancy and the medications used to treat IBD during pregnancy?

ANSWER

Women with IBD appear to be at increased risk of giving birth prematurely, having low-birth-weight infants, and having cesarean sections. Neither 5-aminosalicylic acid nor sulfasalazine has been found to increase the rate of major malformations, fetal mortality, or morbidity. There is conflicting evidence regarding the use of corticosteroids and azathioprine and 6-mercaptopurine. There are limited data on the use of infliximab during pregnancy, although no pattern of defects or complications has been reported to date.

Chronisch-entzündliche Darmerkrankung und Nephritis

An 11 year old CD-patient developed an interstitial nephritis and acute kidney failure following treatment with Mesalazine (5-ASA) and Salazosulfapyridine (SASP). After removal of the medication and treatment with hemofiltration and prednisone there was only an incomplete recovery of the renal function (creatinine-clearance 34 ml/1,73 m2/min). It is thought that an hyperergic-allergic reaction due to SASP and 5-ASA causes interstitial nephritis in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). This reaction can be induced by re-exposition too. On the other hand IBD can be associated with glomerulonephritis. This could be a not very well known extraintestinal manifestation in IBD caused by immune-complexes in serum and glomerula. A rapid histological verification of the renal disease is necessary for successful treatment. In both renal manifestations chronic courses are possible. These observations should not lead to avoid SASP/5-ASA in treatment of IBD, but renal function should be routinely investigated.

Ulcerative colitis: responding to the challenges

Aminosalicylates are the first-line therapy for patients with mild to moderate active ulcerative colitis. Treatment should start at dosages of 4.8 g per day of the active 5-aminosalicylate moiety, rather than starting at a lower dosage and increasing if treatment fails. Infliximab has been shown to be effective and is now approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis in patients who have had an inadequate response to conventional therapy.

Sulfasalazine-induced pericarditis in a patient with ulcerative colitis without recurrence when switching to mesalazine

INTRODUCTION

Pericarditis is rarely reported in inflammatory bowel disease. Besides its common causes, pericarditis could be related to ulcerative colitis flare or to 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) treatment.

CASE REPORT

We report the case of a patient in whom fever, weight loss and pericarditis developed after 16 years of treatment with sulfasalazine for ulcerative colitis, after increasing the daily dosage from 1 to 3 g.

DISCUSSION

The patient recovered after treatment discontinuation and did not exhibit any recurrence of pericarditis when treatment with mesalazine was introduced.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, if pericarditis occurs in ulcerative colitis patients treated with 5-ASA compounds, the treatment should be considered as a possible cause, even after an increase of the dosage. In this case, discontinuation of the treatment and cautious switch to another 5-ASA compound should be tested.

A practical perspective on ulcerative colitis: patients' needs from aminosalicylate therapies

A large, Internet-based survey of a random sample of members of the Crohn's and Colitis Foundation of America was undertaken to gain knowledge and understanding of patients' experiences with ulcerative colitis and first-line therapies. From 49,410 invitations to participate, 1,595 usable responses were received from patients with ulcerative colitis. Patients were prescribed a range of aminosalicylates for their ulcerative colitis. Treatments with the highest proportion of satisfied patients were associated with highest remission rates. Forty-three percent of patients considered their disease to be in remission; however, 74% reported disease relapse during the previous 12 months. Over 60% of patients reported that they were noncompliant with prescribed aminosalicylate dosing schedules, with reasons attributed to frequency of dosing, the number of pills, and the inconvenience of the medication. Many respondents reported that they had made significant lifestyle changes because of their ulcerative colitis, including spending more time at home (46%) and participating in fewer social activities (37%). When asked to describe their ideal treatment, patients considered high efficacy (97%), lack of side effects (74%), nonparenteral dosing (46%), nonrectal dosing (36%), low cost (23%), fewer pills (23%), and less frequent dosing (23%) as "very important." This study demonstrates that continuous symptomatic remission is central to patient satisfaction and that patients find currently available aminosalicylates to be inconvenient. Patients' ideal therapy would be an effective, oral formulation with fewer tablets, less frequent dosing, and minimal side effects. Development of such a therapy would, therefore, potentially improve both patient compliance and overall treatment success.

[Characterization of proteinuria in patients with ulcerative colitis and therapy with aminosalicylates]

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Patients with ulcerative colitis have a higher rate of tubular nephropathies. Data concerning the cause of these lesions is rare and inconsistent, the occurrence may be part of the disease itself or a side effect of 5-aminosalicylates (5-ASA). This study investigated proteinuria and eosinophiluria in patients with moderate ulcerative colitis under treatment with 5-ASA.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Urine specimens (microelectrophoresis and eosinophiluria) of 34 patients with acute onset of moderate ulcerative colitis who were treated only with 5-ASA as active drug were analyzed.

RESULTS

Data of 27 patients could be evaluated. Twelve patients had tubular proteinuria previous to treatment. By the end of the study, urine specimens normalized in six, in further six the proteinuria remained unaltered, two patients developed proteinuria under treatment. In 14 patients, proteinuria was not detectable at any time. Eosinophiluria was found in none of the specimens.

CONCLUSION

Under treatment with 5-ASA no toxic or allergic nephropathy developed. One initially pathologic urine specimen normalized under treatment coming along with remission of the intestinal symptoms and histological findings. This indicates an association between the activity of the ulcerative colitis and might be caused by renal excretion of pro-inflammatory cytokines.

Comparison between nasal and intravenous desmopressin for the treatment of aminosalicylic acid-induced platelet dysfunction

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The study was conducted to compare the standard intravenous route with the intranasal route of desmopressin application and to establish the best time for initiating treatment with desmopressin with the use of the Born test and the PFA 100-Analyzer for monitoring the therapeutic effect.

METHODS

Thirty healthy volunteers (ASA I) with no known bleeding disorder were randomly assigned to an intravenous or an intranasal group in a cross-over design fashion. After obtaining baseline values, the volunteers were given 500 mg aminosalicylic acid for 3 days. On day 4, platelet function tests were performed and desmopressin (0.3 microg kg(-1) body weight) was administered either intravenously or intranasally. Born tests (aggregation after stimulation with epinephrine and collagen) were conducted at 30 and 240 min, and PFA 100 bleeding time measurements were conducted at 30, 120 and 240 min after desmopressin administration. Wilcoxon signed rank sum tests or non-parametric ANOVA for repeated measures were used for statistical evaluation.

RESULTS

All volunteers showed a marked decreased platelet function in the Born test (especially if stimulation with epinephrine was used) and an increased PFA 100 bleeding time after treatment with aminosalicylic acid. Platelet function was improved by intravenous as well as intranasal application of desmopressin (P < 0.001) after 30 min. The effect diminished after 4 h in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous as well as intranasal desmopressin improved platelet function in healthy volunteers with aminosalicylic acid-induced platelet dysfunction at least 30 min after application. The effect lasts up to 4 h.

Polypharmacy and Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND

Polypharmacy has not been defined for Crohn's disease.

AIMS

To determine the prevalence of polypharmacy, factors associated with polypharmacy, and consequences of polypharmacy in a Crohn's disease population.

METHODS

A review of 291 Crohn's disease patients was performed. Polypharmacy was defined as either minor (two to four medications) or major (> or = 5 medications). Clinical status was evaluated with the Harvey-Bradshaw index of disease activity (HBI) and the short inflammatory bowel disease questionnaire (SIBDQ).

RESULTS

Major polypharmacy was identified in 50% of patients. Crohn's disease patients on less than two medications at the intake visit had an HBI of 3.6 compared with 5.4 and 6.0 in the minor and major polypharmacy groups (P < 0.05). Similarly, patients on less than two medications had an SIBDQ of 60.3 compared with 55.7 and 53.4 in the minor and major polypharmacy groups (P = 0.11). Predictors of polypharmacy included age > 40 years (OR 1.9), duration of disease > 10 years (OR 2.0), and female sex (OR 2.5).

CONCLUSIONS

Polypharmacy is common in Crohn's disease and correlates with increased disease activity and decreased quality of life. Increasing age, increasing duration of disease, and female sex are associated with major polypharmacy. These findings emphasize the need for improved treatment algorithms to optimize Crohn's disease patient management.

Comparative pharmacokinetics of equimolar doses of 5-aminosalicylate administered as oral mesalamine (Asacol) and balsalazide: a randomized, single-dose, crossover study in healthy volunteers

BACKGROUND

Existing pharmacokinetic data are insufficient to determine whether a delayed-release formulation of mesalamine (Asacol) results in greater systemic exposure to 5-aminosalicylic acid and its major metabolite N-acetyl-5-aminosalicylic acid than a prodrug (balsalazide).

AIM

To determine the pharmacokinetic parameters of 5-aminosalicylic acid and N-acetyl-5-aminosalicylic acid from equimolar doses of 5-aminosalicylic acid administered as Asacol and balsalazide.

METHODS

Nineteen healthy volunteers completed an open-label, single-dose, randomized, crossover study comparing the pharmacokinetics of 5-aminosalicylic acid and N-acetyl-5-aminosalicylic acid from equimolar doses of 5-aminosalicylic acid (800 mg) administered as Asacol (800 mg) and balsalazide (2250 mg). Plasma and urine samples were analysed for 5-aminosalicylic acid, N-acetyl-5-aminosalicylic acid, and balsalazide (urine only) using high-performance liquid chromatography methods with mass spectrometric detection. Pharmacokinetic parameters assessed for 5-aminosalicylic acid and N-acetyl-5-aminosalicylic acid included: percentage of dose excreted in urine (A(e)%), area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUCt(last)); and maximum plasma concentration (C(max)).

RESULTS

The geometric mean total (5-aminosalicylic acid and N-acetyl-5-aminosalicylic acid) urinary excretion values (A(e)%) of Asacol and balsalazide were 19.26 and 19.31% (P = 0.98). The geometric mean A(e)% values of 5-aminosalicylic acid for Asacol and balsalazide were 0.39 and 0.37% (P = 0.78); the geometric mean A(e)% values of N-acetyl-5-aminosalicylic acid for Asacol and balsalazide were 18.78 and 18.83% (P = 0.98). The geometric mean 5-aminosalicylic acid AUC(t(last)) values for Asacol and balsalazide were 3295 and 3449 ng h/mL (P = 0.85); the geometric mean N-acetyl-5-aminosalicylic acid AUC(t(last)) values for Asacol and balsalazide were 15 364 and 16 050 ng h/mL (P = 0.69). The geometric mean 5-5-aminosalicylic acid C(max) values for Asacol and balsalazide were 319 and 348 ng/mL (P = 0.80); the geometric mean N-acetyl-5-aminosalicylic acid C(max) values for Asacol and balsalazide 927 and 1009 ng/mL (P = 0.67).

CONCLUSIONS

The systemic absorption of 5-aminosalicylic acid and N-acetyl-5-aminosalicylic acid from Asacol and balsalazide are comparable based upon plasma pharmacokinetic parameters and urinary excretion values.

Inflammatory bowel diseases, 5-aminosalicylic acid and sulfasalazine treatment and risk of acute pancreatitis: a population-based case-control study

OBJECTIVES

Patients with inflammatory bowel diseases are suggested to have an increased risk of acute pancreatitis. Although azathioprine and glucocorticoids are risk factors for acute pancreatitis, the relation is poorly understood, in particular the role of 5-aminosalicylic acid and sulfasalazine treatment. To clarify these relations, we conducted a population-based case-control study.

METHODS

We identified 1,590 incident cases of acute pancreatitis from the Hospital Discharge Registry of the North Jutland County of Denmark from 1991 to 2002, and selected 10 controls per case (N = 15,913) from the Central Personal Registry, matched by age and gender. Among cases and controls, we identified patients with inflammatory bowel diseases. Data on drug use were extracted from a Pharmaco-epidemiological Prescription Database.

RESULTS

Adjusted odds ratios for acute pancreatitis in patients with Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis were 3.7 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.9-7.6) and 1.5 (95% CI, 0.7-3.6), respectively. In all patients treated with 5-aminosalicylic acid and sulfasalazine the adjusted odds ratios for acute pancreatitis were 0.7 (95% CI, 0.4-2.2) and 1.5 (95% CI, 0.4-5.2), respectively. Restricted to patients with inflammatory bowel diseases only, the adjusted odds ratios for acute pancreatitis in patients exposed to 5-aminosalicylic acid and sulfasalazine were 0.7 (95% CI, 0.1-3.8) and 0.6 (95% CI, 0.1-6.7), respectively.

CONCLUSION

We found a nearly four-fold increased risk of acute pancreatitis in patients with Crohn's disease and a 1.5-fold increased risk for ulcerative colitis. In patients with inflammatory bowel diseases, the use of 5-aminosalicylic acid or sulfasalazine was not associated with increased risk of acute pancreatitis.

Patient-led variable dosing with balsalazide as long-term therapy for maintenance in ulcerative colitis: a 3-year prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

The patient-centred approach is new to the management of ulcerative colitis. To date, it has only been shown to be successful in a short-term study.

AIM

To assess the feasibility, safety and efficacy of patient-led dosing using balsalazide in the long-term treatment of ulcerative colitis.

METHODS

This was a 3-year, two-cohort, multi-centre study: one cohort was in stable remission (52 patients) and the other was newly in remission (76 patients) from ulcerative colitis. Two 750-mg balsalazide capsules were given twice daily for maintenance, increased by 750-mg increments to a maximum of 6 g for up to 7 days depending on symptom severity. Clinical assessments were made every 12-14 weeks; laboratory assessments were made every 6 months.

RESULTS

The average median daily dose of balsalazide was 3 g (range, 1.5-6 g). In the cohort with stable remission, 23 patients (44%) had relapsed by 3 years [median time to relapse, > 1095 days (36 months)]. In the cohort newly in remission, these values were 45 patients (59%) and 656 days (22 months), respectively. In the cohort with stable remission, the time since last relapse was significantly associated with relapse during the first year of treatment (P < 0.033).

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term, patient-led, maintenance treatment with balsalazide is well tolerated with a good safety profile and is effective for patients with ulcerative colitis.

Systematic review: short-term adverse effects of 5-aminosalicylic acid agents in the treatment of ulcerative colitis

AIM

To determine whether there is a difference in short-term adverse events in patients with ulcerative colitis treated with mesalazine, olsalazine or balsalazide.

METHODS

MEDLINE was searched for articles published until 2002. Randomized trials of oral mesalazine, olsalazine or balsalazide for the treatment of active disease or the maintenance of remission were included. Outcomes of interest were the frequencies of patients experiencing adverse events and those withdrawn due to adverse events.

RESULTS

Forty-six trials were included. One study of mesalazine vs. sulfasalazine for active colitis showed significantly fewer patients with adverse events with mesalazine. Both balsalazide vs. sulfasalazine studies for active disease showed significantly fewer withdrawals with balsalazide. One trial of balsalazide vs. sulfasalazine for maintenance showed significantly fewer patients with adverse events with balsalazide. Otherwise, no significant differences in safety outcomes were noted.

CONCLUSION

All three 5-aminosalicylic acid agents are safe in the short term. In mesalazine-treated patients, the frequencies of adverse events or withdrawals due to adverse events were comparable with those in placebo-treated patients and lower than those in sulfasalazine-treated patients. Overall, adverse events or withdrawals were not significantly more frequent with olsalazine than with placebo or sulfasalazine. Adverse events and study withdrawals on balsalazide were less frequent than those on sulfasalazine.

The short- and long-term safety of 5-aminosalicylate products in the treatment of ulcerative colitis

5-aminosalicylic acid agents are effective in the treatment of ulcerative colitis. Balsalazide, mesalamine, and olsalazine are alternative formulations to sulfasalazine for the delivery of 5-aminosalicylic acid. The newer compounds might be better tolerated than sulfasalazine in some patients, as long as the intolerance is not due to hypersensitivity to 5-aminosalicylic acid. Adverse events requiring the withdrawal of therapy seem to occur less frequently with balsalazide, mesalamine, and olsalazine compared with sulfasalazine. If patients are unable to tolerate any one of these three 5-aminosalicylic acid-releasing preparations, they might be able to tolerate one of the others, as long as the intolerance is not due to hypersensitivity to 5-aminosalicylic acid.

Treatment of inflammatory bowel disease: safety and tolerability issues

An examination is needed of the potential adverse effects of the agents most commonly used to treat inflammatory bowel disease. Most of these therapies can be used safely to induce or maintain remissions, although some aspects of monitoring for toxicity are necessary. Aminosalicylates, including sulfasalazine and mesalamine delivery systems, are most commonly associated with sulfa-related effects (sulfasalazine) or intolerance, with rare instances of nephritis, pulmonitis, hepatitis, or worsening colitis. The immunomodulators are most commonly associated with bone marrow suppression, hepatitis, and the risk of opportunistic infections. Methotrexate is contraindicated in pregnancy. Antibiotics used for inflammatory bowel disease are generally safe and well tolerated, although metronidazole carries a long-term risk of peripheral neuropathy. The well-recognized multitude of adverse effects from corticosteroids are eliminated or minimized when rapidly metabolized steroids, such as budesonide, are used.

Drug utilization study in patients with Crohn's disease in Spain

OBJECTIVE

To discover the therapeutic strategies for Crohn's disease used in Spain and to analyse the factors associated with the use of each treatment.

DESIGN

Observational, cross-sectional study of patients with Crohn's disease who attended hospitals in Spain.

METHODS

Two structured questionnaires were used, one completed by gastroenterologists about demographic clinical data and disease activity, and the other a telephone interview with the patients to obtain epidemiological and drug utilization data.

RESULTS

A total of 635 patients from 39 hospitals were included. Aminosalicylates (77%) and corticosteroids (41%) were the most commonly used drugs. Monotherapy was used in 52% of the patients and was associated with less severe disease and relapse. Aminosalicylate use was associated with relapse and associated inversely with use of immunosuppressors. Corticosteroid use was associated with relapse, disease activity, and emergency visit frequency, and associated inversely with perianal disease. Use of immunosuppressors was associated with perianal disease, chronic active disease, and routine visit frequency, and associated inversely with aminosalicylate use. Antibiotic use was associated with relapse, perianal disease, chronic active disease and hospitalization.

CONCLUSION

Aminosalicylates, corticosteroids and a combination of both drugs are the drugs used most frequently against Crohn's disease in Spain. Gender, age, clinical pattern and location were not associated with the type of drug used either in monotherapy or in combined therapy.

Inflammatory bowel disease in pregnancy

Women and men with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) frequently express concerns about fertility and pregnancy. The evidence suggests that women with IBD can expect to have a normal pregnancy outcome provided they have inactive disease. They have an increased risk of having a small or premature baby but the majority will have a normal outcome of pregnancy. The commonly used drugs appear to be safe and well tolerated in pregnancy. There remains a need for further studies in this area to help in the difficult decisions about the management of IBD around the time of conception and during pregnancy.

Balsalazide is superior to mesalamine in the time to improvement of signs and symptoms of acute mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis

OBJECTIVE

Balsalazide is a novel azo-bonded 5-aminosalicylic acid treatment for mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis. The study objective was to compare symptomatic remission rates with balsalazide and mesalamine while controlling for extent of disease and time since diagnosis in patients with active, mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis.

METHODS

A total of 173 patients with sigmoidoscopically verified ulcerative colitis were randomized to 8 wk of double-blind treatment with balsalazide 6.75 g/day or mesalamine 2.4 g/day. Both treatments provided 2.4 g/day of oral 5-aminosalicylic acid. Patients maintained symptom diaries throughout the treatment period.

RESULTS

Overall, 46% of balsalazide- and 44% of mesalamine-treated patients achieved symptomatic remission. Higher response rates were noted in newly diagnosed patients with < or = 40 cm of disease (68% vs 61%) than in recently relapsed patients with >40 cm of disease (36% vs 25%). The median time to symptomatic remission was 12 days shorter with balsalazide (25 days) than with mesalamine (37 days). Significantly more balsalazide patients showed sigmoidoscopic (p = 0.002), stool frequency (p = 0.006), rectal bleeding (p = 0.006), and physician's global assessment score (p = 0.013) improvement by 14 days than did mesalamine patients. Similar proportions of patients reported adverse events (54% vs 64%), which were most commonly related to the gastrointestinal and central and peripheral nervous systems.

CONCLUSIONS

Balsalazide is an effective and safe treatment for mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis. Improvement of symptoms occurs considerably earlier with balsalazide than with mesalamine.

Balsalazide: a review of its therapeutic use in mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis

The aminosalicylate balsalazide is a prodrug which is metabolised by bacterial azo reductases in the colon to release its therapeutically active moiety mesalazine [mesalamine (US) or 5-aminosalicylic acid] and an inert carrier molecule. The systemic absorption of balsalazide and its metabolites is not required for the therapeutic efficacy of the drug, and has been demonstrated to be limited. Data from well designed trials with a duration of 8 to 12 weeks show that oral balsalazide 6.75 g/day is as effective as (two trials) or more effective than (one trial) oral delayed-release (pH-dependent) mesalazine 2.4 g/day and appears to be as effective as oral sulfasalazine 3 g/day in the treatment of active mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis. In addition, balsalazide appears to have a faster onset of action than mesalazine. Furthermore, balsalazide was as effective as delayed-release mesalazine (dosages used were 1.2 and 1.5 g/day, where 1.6 g/day is recommended) and oral sulfasalazine 2 g/day (recommended dosage) in the prevention of relapse in ulcerative colitis in remission after 6 to 12 months of treatment; the balsalazide dosage was 3 g/day versus mesalazine and 2 g/day versus sulfasalazine. Although not well established, additional benefits may be achieved with balsalazide dosages up to 6 g/day. Data from well designed, 2- to 12-month trials show that balsalazide is well tolerated by patients with ulcerative colitis in both acute and maintenance indications, and is better tolerated than standard formulations of sulfasalazine at therapeutically relevant dosages.

CONCLUSION

Balsalazide is a well tolerated and effective first-line therapeutic option for patients with ulcerative colitis, both for the treatment of active mild-to-moderate disease and as maintenance therapy to prevent disease relapse.

A randomized, double blind, dose-response comparison of balsalazide (6.75 g), balsalazide (2.25 g), and mesalamine (2.4 g) in the treatment of active, mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis

OBJECTIVE

Balsalazide is a new innovative, mesalamine-containing prodrug that is activated by bacteria in the colon. Balsalazide has been shown previously to be well tolerated and effective in the treatment of acute ulcerative colitis. The aim of this study was to determine the dose-response of balsalazide for efficacy and safety in active, mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis and to compare this profile with that of mesalamine, pH-dependent, delayed-release tablets.

METHODS

A multicenter, randomized, active control, double-blind, double-dummy, dose-response, parallel-group study was performed comparing balsalazide (6.75 g daily), balsalazide (2.25 g daily), and mesalamine (2.4 g daily), administered for 8 wk to 154 patients with active, mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis as verified by sigmoidoscopy.

RESULTS

Eight weeks of treatment with 6.75 g of balsalazide daily provided significantly greater improvement than did balsalazide (2.25 g daily) in rectal bleeding (64.7% [6.75-g balsalazide] vs 32.4% [2.25-g balsalazide], p < 0.006), stool frequency (58.8% vs 29.4%, p < 0.006), sigmoidoscopic score (78.9% vs 52.5%, p < 0.015), and Physician's Global Assessment (73.7% vs 51.3%, p < 0.03). The efficacy of balsalazide showed a significantly more rapid onset of action than that of mesalamine (2.4 g daily) (2-wk sigmoidocopic score improvement, 54.7% [6.75-g balsalazide] vs 29.4% [2.4-g mesalamine], p = 0.006) with numerically greater improvement at 8 wk in five of seven measured signs and symptoms. Balsalazide (6.75 g daily) was well tolerated, and the safety profile did not differ significantly from that of balsalazide (2.25 g daily) or mesalamine.

CONCLUSIONS

Eight weeks of treatment with balsalazide (6.75 g daily) is significantly more effective than balsalazide (2.25 g daily) and more rapid in onset than mesalamine (2.4 g daily) in improving signs and symptoms of acute ulcerative colitis. Balsalazide (6.75 g daily) is well tolerated, and the safety profile does not differ from that of balsalazide (2.25 g daily) and mesalamine (2.4 g daily).

Review article: monitoring for drug side-effects in inflammatory bowel disease

The side-effects suitable for monitoring in patients with inflammatory bowel disease being treated with the four main groups of drugs (5-aminosalicylic acid preparations, azathioprine and 6-mercaptopurine, methotrexate, and corticosteroids) are reviewed. On the basis of the reported frequency, severity and timing of side-effects, a practical scheme of monitoring is recommended. This includes a baseline measurement of full blood count, creatinine and liver function tests in all patients. In the absence of worrying symptoms, we recommend the following: (i) no monitoring for sulfasalazine; (ii) for other 5-aminosalicylic acid preparations, the measurement of creatinine at 6 and 12 months and then annually; (iii) for azathioprine/6-mercaptopurine, thiopurine methyltransferase genotype/phenotype determination has no role in treatment monitoring, but a full blood count at 2 weeks, 1 month, 3 months and then every 3 months should be performed; (iv) for methotrexate, a full blood count and liver function tests should be performed every 3 months; (v) for steroids, dual energy X-ray absorptiometry bone scanning should be performed at the start of therapy, every year in which steroids are used if the T score is < 0, and every 3-5 years if the T score is > 0.

Evaluation of renal function following treatment with 5-aminosalicylic acid derivatives in patients with ulcerative colitis

BACKGROUND

A number of cases of nephrotoxicity have been reported in patients with inflammatory bowel disease taking oral 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA).

AIM

To evaluate the effects of 9 months of therapy with mesalazine or olsalazine on renal function in patients with ulcerative colitis in remission.

METHODS

Forty patients with ulcerative colitis in complete remission for 6 months were randomized to either olsalazine (n=20) or mesalazine (n=20 for nine months). Thirty-six of the 40 patients were on prior salicylate therapy. Disease activity was the measure ofclinical efficacy and was assessed by the Harvey-Bradshaw Index (HBI). Laboratory efficacy measurements included glomerular filtration rate (GFR), microalbuminuria, urinary gluthathione S-transferase (GST) and serum C-reactive protein (CRP). Safety analysis consisted of documentation of adverse events and laboratory values.

RESULTS

There was no significant reduction in the GFR overall on therapy. The levels of GFR adjusted for baseline were similar in the two treatment groups after 3, 6 and 9 months. A significantly higher percentage of mesalazine-treated patients experienced drug related adverse events, all of a minor nature. The incidence of adverse events causing early withdrawal was similar in the two treatment groups.

CONCLUSION

Treatment with mesalazine or olsalazine for 9 months had no significant impact on GFR.

A double-blind comparison of balsalazide, 6.75 g daily, and sulfasalazine, 3 g daily, in patients with newly diagnosed or relapsed active ulcerative colitis

BACKGROUND

Sulfasalazine is well established in the treatment of active ulcerative colitis. Intolerance to sulfasalazine, however, is a common problem. Balsalazide has been designed to deliver 5-aminosalicylic acid to the colon without the poor tolerability of sulfasalazine.

AIM

To compare the safety and efficacy of balsalazide, 6.75 g daily, with sulfasalazine, 3 g daily, in the treatment of active ulcerative colitis of all grades of severity.

METHODS

Balsalazide and sulfasalazine were compared in a multicentre, double-blind, parallel group study over 12 weeks. Patients were stratified for disease severity and topical and/or oral steroids were co-administered where clinically necessary.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven patients were randomized: 28 to receive balsalazide and 29 to receive sulfasalazine. Significantly fewer patients withdrew from the balsalazide group due to adverse events (2/28 vs. 9/29, P=0.041). These data confirm that balsalazide is better tolerated than sulfasalazine. In patients able to tolerate the treatment, similar improvements were recorded in clinical, sigmoidoscopic and histological assessments in both treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms the better tolerability of balsalazide compared to sulfasalazine, and supports the use of balsalazide in ulcerative colitis of all grades of severity.

A double-blind comparison of balsalazide, 6.75 g, and sulfasalazine, 3 g, as sole therapy in the management of ulcerative colitis

BACKGROUND

Sulfasalazine is accepted therapy for active ulcerative colitis, but side-effects and intolerance are common. Balsalazide is an azo-bonded pro-drug which also releases 5-aminosalicylic acid into the colon, but uses an inert carrier molecule.

AIM

To compare the safety and efficacy of sul- fasalazine, 3 g, with balsalazide, 6.75 g, in the initial daily treatment of mild to moderate ulcerative colitis.

METHODS

A randomized, multicentre, double-blind, parallel group study was performed, with a treatment duration of 8 weeks. Patients on previous maintenance treatment were excluded. The trial medication was the sole treatment for the colitis. Efficacy was assessed by patient diaries, symptom assessment, sigmoidoscopic appearance and histology.

RESULTS

Fifty patients were recruited: 26 allocated to the balsalazide group and 24 to the sulfasalazine group. More patients withdrew due to adverse events in the sulfasalazine group (nine patients vs. one patient in the balsalazide group, P=0.004). Improvement occurred in both groups, with a tendency to a faster response with balsalazide. Of the patients taking balsalazide, 61% achieved clinical and sigmoidoscopic remission.

CONCLUSIONS

Balsalazide, 6.75 g, is effective as the sole treatment for patients with mild to moderately active ulcerative colitis, with significantly fewer withdrawals due to side-effects than in a similar group of patients taking sulfasalazine, 3 g.

Maintenance drugs for inflammatory bowel disease

Ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease are chronic relapsing inflammatory disorders of the bowel that affect 2-4 per 1,000 people in Northern Europe. The course of these diseases is difficult to predict and relapses can occur many years after presentation. Various drugs (and/or surgery in Crohn's disease) are used to induce remission, and maintenance drug therapy is commonly given to prevent relapse once remission is achieved. Here, we consider maintenance drug treatment, in particular the size and duration of benefit and potential short-term and long-term risks associated with such therapy.

Low dose balsalazide (1.5 g twice daily) and mesalazine (0.5 g three times daily) maintained remission of ulcerative colitis but high dose balsalazide (3.0 g twice daily) was superior in preventing relapses

BACKGROUND

Balsalazide is a new 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) containing prodrug. Its efficacy in comparison with standard mesalazine therapy and the optimum dose for maintaining remission of ulcerative colitis are still unclear.

AIMS

To compare the relapse preventing effect and safety profile of two doses of balsalazide and a standard dose of Eudragit coated mesalazine.

METHODS

A total of 133 patients with ulcerative colitis in remission were recruited to participate in a double blind, multicentre, randomised trial: 49 patients received balsalazide 1.5 g twice daily, 40 received balsalazide 3.0 g twice daily, and 44 received mesalazine 0.5 g three times daily. Efficacy assessments were clinical activity index (CAI) and endoscopic score according to Rachmilewitz, and a histological score. In addition, laboratory tests were performed and urinary excretion of 5-ASA and its metabolite N-Ac-5-ASA was analysed. The study lasted for 26 weeks.

RESULTS

Balsalazide 3.0 g twice daily resulted in a significantly higher clinical remission rate (77.5%) than balsalazide 1.5 g twice daily (43.8%) and mesalazine 0.5 g three times daily (56.8%) (p=0.006). The respective times to relapse were 161 days, 131 days (p=0.003), and 144 days (NS). Accordingly, pairwise contrasts of the final endoscopic score demonstrated a significant difference (p=0.005) between the two balsalazide treatment groups while differences between either of these two groups and mesalazine were not statistically significant. Patients treated with balsalazide excreted less 5-ASA and N-Ac-5-ASA than patients receiving mesalazine but these differences were not statistically significant. Discontinuation of the trial because of adverse effects occurred in nine patients: three in the balsalazide 1.5 g twice daily group, two in the balsalazide 3.0 g twice daily group, and four in the mesalazine 0.5 g three times daily group. No clinically important new drug safety related findings were identified in this study.

CONCLUSIONS

High dose balsalazide (3.0 g twice daily) was superior in maintaining remission in patients with ulcerative colitis compared with a low dose (1.5 g twice daily) or a standard dose of mesalazine (0.5 g three times daily). All three treatments were safe and well tolerated.

Leucopenia resulting from a drug interaction between azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine and mesalamine, sulphasalazine, or balsalazide

AIM

We evaluated the effect of coadministration of sulphasalazine, mesalamine, and balsalazide on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of azathioprine and 6-mercaptopurine.

METHODS

Thirty four patients with Crohn's disease receiving azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine were enrolled in an eight week non-randomised parallel group drug interaction study and treated with mesalamine 4 g/day, sulphasalazine 4 g/day, or balsalazide 6.75 g/day. The primary outcome measure was the occurrence of clinically important leucopenia during the study, defined separately as total leucocyte counts < 3.0 x 10(9)/l and < or = 3.5 x 10(9)/l. Whole blood 6-thioguanine nucleotide concentrations were determined.

RESULTS

Three patients could not be evaluated for the primary outcome measure. In the remaining 31 patients, the frequency of total leucocyte counts < 3.0 and < or = 3.5 were: 1/10 and 5/10 in the mesalamine group; 1/11 and 6/11 in the sulphasalazine group; and 0/10 and 2/10 in the balsalazide group. There were significant increases in mean whole blood 6-thioguanine nucleotide concentrations from baseline at most time points in the mesalamine and sulphasalazine groups but not in the balsalazide group.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with Crohn's disease receiving azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine, coadministration of mesalamine, sulphasalazine, and possibly balsalazide results in an increase in whole blood 6-thioguanine nucleotide concentrations and a high frequency of leucopenia.

Review article: balsalazide therapy in ulcerative colitis

Balsalazide is a 5-aminosalicylic acid (mesalazine) pro-drug which has an inert carrier molecule instead of the sulfapyridine moiety of sulfasalazine. It is designed to deliver 5-aminosalicylic acid to the colonic mucosa without the sulfapyridine-associated side-effects encountered with sulfasalazine. Several studies have confirmed the efficacy and patient tolerance of balsalazide. When compared to mesalazine at equivalent doses, it induced symptomatic and complete remission of acute ulcerative colitis in a greater proportion of patients. In particular, patients with resistant left-sided disease were shown to have a higher probability of achieving remission. Balsalazide was beneficial in patients with troublesome nocturnal symptoms. It has a similar efficacy in maintaining remission when compared to sulfasalazine and mesalazine. The advantage of balsalazide over other 5-aminosalicylic acid compounds is its superior patient tolerability with minimal side-effects.

Tolerability of aminosalicylates in inflammatory bowel disease

Since its synthesis in the 1930s and subsequent introduction, sulfasalazine has been an effective treatment for inflammatory bowel disease. However, up to one-third of patients are unable to take the drug because of severe intolerance. The finding in 1977 that the anticolitic effect of sulfasalazine lay in its 5-aminosalicylic [(5-ASA); mesalazine] moiety led to the development of new generations of 5-ASA agents. These new agents include a slow continuous release formulation, pH-dependent release formulations, formulations using alternative carrier molecules and rectally administered formulations. Newer 5-ASA formulations are more effective than placebo in maintaining remission of ulcerative colitis. They have also been used for the treatment of active Crohn's disease as well as maintenance treatment of ileocolonic Crohn's disease, although their role in isolated small bowel disease is controversial. In general terms, all of the newer 5-ASA preparations are much better tolerated than sulfasalazine. The use of standard dosages of mesalazine in pregnancy appears to be tolerated; however, continuing surveillance of pregnancy outcome is recommended. While there is evidence that mesalazine can cause nephrotoxic reactions, these reactions can occur with all 5-ASA-containing preparations, particularly in individuals with existing renal disease. Blood dyscrasias can also occur with all aminosalicylates.

Minimal renal dysfunction in inflammatory bowel disease is related to disease activity but not to 5-ASA use

BACKGROUND

Conflicting data exist about proteinuria in inflammatory bowel diseases. It is still unclear whether the occurrence of proteinuria in inflammatory bowel disease patients is an extra-intestinal manifestation of disease or the result of adverse effects to medication, especially to aminosalicylates (ASA).

METHODS

A total of 95 patients (51 with Crohn's disease and 44 with ulcerative colitis) were enrolled in the study. Disease activity was assessed by Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) or the Truelove index, respectively. Urine was collected over 24 h and protein excretion of specific marker proteins for tubular (alpha 1-microglobulin-alpha 1-MG) and glomerular (albumin-Alb, Immunoglobulin G-IgG) dysfunction was measured using a highly sensitive immunoluminometric assay.

RESULTS

Out of 51 Crohn's disease patients, 20 showed elevated urinary alpha 1-MG. The amount of alpha 1-MGuria was strongly correlated to the CDAI (r=0.6, P < 0.001). Only four Crohn's disease patients showed slightly elevated values for glomerular proteins in urine. Similar results were obtained for ulcerative colitis: whereas only two ulcerative colitis patients showed albuminuria, tubular proteinuria was detected in 28 out of 44 ulcerative colitis patients. Proteinuria was strongly dependent on disease activity (P < 0.01) but was not related to ASA treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Proteinuria of tubular marker proteins occurs in the majority of inflammatory bowel disease patients and is related to disease activity rather than to ASA treatment. Tubular proteinuria seems to reflect a renal extra-intestinal manifestation of inflammatory bowel disease and may serve as a new relevant marker of disease activity.

Glomerular and tubular renal functions after long-term medication of sulphasalazine, olsalazine, and mesalazine in patients with ulcerative colitis

To date there are only few reports evaluating the potential nephrotoxic reactions of the new 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) preparations in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). The aim of this study was to screen the tubular and glomerular functions in patients with UC in maintenance treatment with either 5-ASA azo-compounds (sulphasalazine and olsalazine) or mesalazine. Patients with UC in clinical remission treated with either sulphasalazine, olsalazine, or mesalazine for more than 1 year were included in an open, single-blind retrospective Norwegian multicenter study. Serum and urine creatinine, serum and urine beta2-microglobulin, urine N-acetyl-beta-glucoseamidase (NAG), urine alkaline phosphatase, urine microalbumin, urine alanine amino peptidase, and urine beta2-microglobulin were measured. Fifty-two females and 75 males (n = 127), ages 20-69, were evaluated. Thirty-six patients were treated with sulphasalazine (mean treatment time 10.1+/-6.6 years [mean +/- SD]), 32 patients were treated with olsalazine (2.3+/-1.4 years), and 59 patients with mesalazine (3.2+/-2.0 years). At inclusion, there were no significant differences in the serum or urine values between the groups. In 17 patients (1 patient [3%] in the sulphasalazine group, 4 patients [13%] in the olsalazine group, and 12 patients [20%] in the mesalazine group), at least one abnormal serum and/or urine value was detected. After 10 years of treatment, only one abnormal value was found among the 19 patients in the sulphasalazine group. The abnormal values observed in the other groups indicated minor glomerular or tubular renal damage. In conclusion, long term sulphasalazine treatment appears to be safe and free of nephrotoxic side effects, whereas minor glomerular and tubular impairment are observed in a few patients treated with olsalazine and mesalazine.

Acute pancreatitis in a child with idiopathic ulcerative colitis on long-term 5-aminosalicylic acid therapy

Acute pancreatitis is a rare but known complication of inflammatory bowel disease in adults. In children, only a few cases with this complication have been reported. We describe a 10-year-old boy with ulcerative colitis who developed acute pancreatitis while on long-term treatment with 5-aminosalicylic acid.

The role of aminosalicylates at the beginning of the new millennium in the treatment of chronic inflammatory bowel disease

OBJECTIVE

To discuss the pharmacological properties of aminosalicylates and their potential value in the treatment of chronic inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

METHODS

A review of clinical studies on the pharmacokinetics and mode of action of aminosalicylates is provided. In addition, the clinical efficacy and safety of aminosalicylates in the treatment of IBD, according to several recent meta-analyses, is summarised.

RESULTS

Whereas aminosalicylates represent drugs of first choice in the acute treatment of ulcerative colitis and also for maintaining those patients in remission, their value for patients with Crohn's disease, either for achieving or maintaining remission, is at best modest. There is a large variability in the clinical results, especially in Crohn's disease, which is probably due to the variable extent and severity of IBD, different instruments in the evaluation of therapeutic outcome, and also at least partly caused by the different preparations and dosages of aminosalicylates used, as well as the high variation in drug disposition and topical availability of the active drug. The popular use of aminosalicylates is most likely due to the low incidence of side effects and the good overall safety records of mesalazine (mesalamine).

CONCLUSIONS

Apparently, the full therapeutic potential of aminosalicylates has not yet been evaluated (e.g. upper dosage range, combination therapy, responding subgroups). Consequently, the imperfect treatment might be improved in the new millennium by novel insights in the complex mode of action of mesalazine as well as in the etiopathogenesis of IBD.