Background
Maintenance of remission is a major issue in inflammatory bowel disease. In ulcerative colitis, the evidence for the effectiveness of azathioprine and 6‐mercaptopurine for the maintenance ...of remission is still controversial.
Objectives
To assess the effectiveness and safety of azathioprine and 6‐mercaptopurine for maintaining remission of ulcerative colitis.
Search methods
The MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to 30 July 2015. Both full randomized controlled trials and associated s were included.
Selection criteria
Randomized controlled trials of at least 12 months duration that compared azathioprine or 6‐mercaptopurine with placebo or standard maintenance therapy (e.g. mesalazine) were included.
Data collection and analysis
Two authors independently extracted data using standard forms. Disagreements were solved by consensus including a third author. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The primary outcome was failure to maintain clinical or endoscopic remission. Secondary outcomes included adverse events and withdrawal due to adverse events. Analyses were performed separately by type of control (placebo, or active comparator). Pooled risk ratios were calculated based on the fixed‐effect model unless heterogeneity was shown. The GRADE approach was used to assess the overall quality of evidence for pooled outcomes.
Main results
Seven studies including 302 patients with ulcerative colitis were included in the review. The risk of bias was high in three of the studies due to lack of blinding. Azathioprine was shown to be significantly superior to placebo for maintenance of remission. Fourty‐four per cent (51/115) of azathioprine patients failed to maintain remission compared to 65% (76/117) of placebo patients (4 studies, 232 patients; RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.86). A GRADE analysis rated the overall quality of the evidence for this outcome as low due to risk of bias and imprecision (sparse data). Two trials that compared 6‐mercaptopurine to mesalazine, or azathioprine to sulfasalazine showed significant heterogeneity and thus were not pooled. Fifty per cent (7/14) of 6‐mercaptopurine patients failed to maintain remission compared to 100% (8/8) of mesalazine patients (1 study, 22 patients; RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.90). Fifty‐eight per cent (7/12) of azathioprine patients failed to maintain remission compared to 38% (5/13) of sulfasalazine patients (1 study, 25 patients; RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.66 to 3.50). One small study found that 6‐mercaptopurine was superior to methotrexate for maintenance of remission. In the study, 50% (7/14) of 6‐mercaptopurine patients and 92% (11/12) of methotrexate patients failed to maintain remission (1 study, 26 patients; RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.95). One very small study compared azathioprine with cyclosporin and found that there was no significant difference between patients failing remission on azathioprine (50%, 4/8) or cyclosporin (62.5%, 5/8) (1 study, 16 patients, RR 0.80 95% CI 0.33 to 1.92). When placebo‐controlled studies were pooled with aminosalicylate‐comparator studies to assess adverse events, there was no statistically significant difference between azathioprine and control in the incidence of adverse events. Nine per cent (11/127) of azathioprine patients experienced at least one adverse event compared to 2% (3/130) of placebo patients (5 studies, 257 patients; RR 2.82, 95% CI 0.99 to 8.01). Patients receiving azathioprine were at significantly increased risk of withdrawing due to adverse events. Eight per cent (8/101) of azathioprine patients withdrew due to adverse events compared to 0% (0/98) of control patients (5 studies, 199 patients; RR 5.43, 95% CI 1.02 to 28.75). Adverse events related to study medication included acute pancreatitis (3 cases, plus 1 case on cyclosporin) and significant bone marrow suppression (5 cases). Deaths, opportunistic infection or neoplasia were not reported.
Authors' conclusions
Azathioprine therapy appears to be more effective than placebo for maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis. Azathioprine or 6‐mercaptopurine may be effective as maintenance therapy for patients who have failed or cannot tolerate mesalazine or sulfasalazine and for patients who require repeated courses of steroids. More research is needed to evaluate superiority over standard maintenance therapy, especially in the light of a potential for adverse events from azathioprine. This review updates the existing review of azathioprine and 6‐mercaptopurine for maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis which was published in the Cochrane Library (September 2012).
Background
Although corticosteroids are effective for induction of remission of Crohn's disease, many patients relapse when steroids are withdrawn or become steroid dependent. Furthermore, ...corticosteroids exhibit significant adverse effects. The success of methotrexate as a treatment for rheumatoid arthritis led to its evaluation in patients with refractory Crohn's disease. Methotrexate has been studied for induction of remission of refractory Crohn's disease and has become the principal alternative to azathioprine or 6‐mercaptopurine therapy. This systematic review is an update of previously published Cochrane reviews.
Objectives
The primary objective was to assess the efficacy and safety of methotrexate for induction of remission in patients with active Crohn's disease in the presence or absence of concomitant steroid therapy.
Search methods
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL and the Cochrane IBD/FBD group specialized register from inception to June 9, 2014 for relevant studies. Conference proceedings and reference lists were also searched to identify additional studies.
Selection criteria
Randomized controlled trials of methotrexate compared to placebo or an active comparator for treatment of active refractory Crohn's disease in adult patients (> 17 years) were considered for inclusion.
Data collection and analysis
The primary outcome was failure to enter remission and withdraw from steroids. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, withdrawal due to adverse events, serious adverse events and quality of life. We calculated the relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for each outcome. Data were analyzed on an intention‐to‐treat basis. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess the methodological quality of included studies. The GRADE approach was used to assess the overall quality of evidence supporting the primary outcome.
Main results
Seven studies (495 patients) were included. Four studies were rated as low risk of bias. Three studies were rated as high risk of bias due to open label or single‐blind designs. The seven studies differed with respect to participants, intervention, and outcomes to the extent that meta‐analysis was considered to be inappropriate. GRADE analyses indicated that the quality of evidence was very low to low for most outcomes due to sparse data and inadequate blinding. Three small studies which employed low dose oral methotrexate showed no statistically significant difference in failure to induce remission between methotrexate and placebo or between methotrexate and 6‐mercaptopurine. For the study using 15 mg/week of oral methotrexate 33% (5/15) of methotrexate patients failed to enter remission compared to 11% (2/18) of placebo patients (RR 3.00, 95% CI 0.68 to 13.31). For the study using 12.5 mg/week of oral methotrexate 62% (16/26) of methotrexate patients failed to enter remission compared to 54% (14/26) of placebo patients (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.82). This study also had an active comparator arm, 62% (16/26) of methotrexate patients failed to enter remission compared to 59% (19/32) of 6‐mercaptopurine patients (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.57). For the active comparator study using 15 mg/week oral methotrexate, 20% (3/15) of methotrexate patients failed to enter remission compared to 6% of 6‐mercaptopurine patients (RR 3.20, 95% CI 0.37 to 27.49). This study also had a 5‐ASA arm and found that methotrexate patients were significantly more likely to enter remission than 5‐ASA patients. Twenty per cent (3/15) of methotrexate patients failed to enter remission compared to 86% (6/7) of 5‐ASA patients (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.67). One small study which used a higher dose of intravenous or oral methotrexate (25 mg/week) showed no statistically significant difference between methotrexate and azathioprine. Forty‐four per cent (12/27) of methotrexate patients failed to enter remission compared to 37% of azathioprine patients (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.63 to 2.29). Two studies found no statistically significant difference in failure to enter remission between the combination of infliximab and methotrexate and infliximab monotherapy. One small study utilized intravenous methotrexate (20 mg/week) for 5 weeks and then switched to oral (20 mg/week). Forty‐five per cent (5/11) of patients in the combination group failed to enter remission compared to 62% of infliximab patients (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.69). The other study assessing combination therapy utilized subcutaneous methotrexate (maximum dose 25 mg/week). Twenty‐four per cent (15/63) of patients in the combination group failed to enter remission compared to 22% (14/63) of infliximab patients (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.57 to 2.03). A large placebo‐controlled study which employed a high dose of methotrexate intramuscularly showed a statistically significant benefit relative to placebo. Sixty‐one per cent of methotrexate patients failed to enter remission compared to 81% of placebo patients (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.93; number needed to treat, NNT=5). Withdrawals due to adverse events were significantly more common in methotrexate patients than placebo in this study. Seventeen per cent of methotrexate patients withdrew due to adverse events compared to 2% of placebo patients (RR 8.00, 95% CI 1.09 to 58.51). The incidence of adverse events was significantly more common in methotrexate patients (63%, 17/27) than azathioprine patients (26%, 7/27) in one small study (RR 2.42, 95% CI 1.21 to 4.89). No other statistically significant differences in adverse events, withdrawals due to adverse events or serious adverse events were reported in any of the other placebo‐controlled or active comparator studies. Common adverse events included nausea and vomiting, abdominal pain, diarrhea, skin rash and headache.
Authors' conclusions
There is evidence from a single large randomized trial which suggests that intramuscular methotrexate (25 mg/week) provides a benefit for induction of remission and complete withdrawal from steroids in patients with refractory Crohn's disease. Lower dose oral methotrexate does not appear to provide any significant benefit relative to placebo or active comparator. However, these trials were small and further studies of oral methotrexate may be justified. Comparative studies of methotrexate to drugs such as azathioprine or 6‐mercaptopurine would require the randomization of large numbers of patients. The addition of methotrexate to infliximab therapy does not appear to provide any additional benefit over infliximab monotherapy. However these studies were relatively small and further research is needed to determine the role of methotrexate when used in conjunction with infliximab or other biological therapies.
Maintenance of remission is a major issue in inflammatory bowel disease. In ulcerative colitis, the evidence for the effectiveness of azathioprine and 6-mercaptopurine for the maintenance of ...remission is still controversial.
To assess the effectiveness and safety of azathioprine and 6-mercaptopurine for maintaining remission of ulcerative colitis.
The MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to June 2012. A manual search was also performed using references from these articles as well as review articles, and proceedings from major gastrointestinal meetings. Authors of maintenance trials were asked about unpublished studies.
Randomized controlled trials of at least 12 months duration that compared azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine with placebo or standard maintenance therapy (e.g. mesalazine) were included.
Two authors independently extracted data using standard forms. Disagreements were solved by consensus including a third author. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The primary outcome was failure to maintain clinical or endoscopic remission. Secondary outcomes included adverse events and withdrawal due to adverse events. Analyses were performed separately by type of control (placebo, or active comparator). Pooled risk ratios were calculated based on the fixed-effect model unless heterogeneity was shown. The GRADE approach was used to assess the overall quality of evidence for pooled outcomes.
Six studies including 286 patients with ulcerative colitis were included in the review. The risk of bias was high in three of the studies due to lack of blinding. Azathioprine was shown to be significantly superior to placebo for maintenance of remission. Fourty-four per cent (51/115) of azathioprine patients failed to maintain remission compared to 65% (76/117) of placebo patients (4 studies, 232 patients; RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.86). A GRADE analysis rated the overall quality of the evidence for this outcome as low due to risk of bias and imprecision (sparse data). Two trials that compared 6-mercaptopurine to mesalazine, or azathioprine to sulfasalazine showed significant heterogeneity and thus were not pooled. Fifty per cent (7/14) of 6-mercaptopurine patients failed to maintain remission compared to 100% (8/8) of mesalamine patients (1 study, 22 patients; RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.90). Fifty-eight per cent (7/12) of azathioprine patients failed to maintain remission compared to 38% (5/13) of sulfasalazine patients (1 study, 25 patients; RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.66 to 3.50). One small study found that 6-mercaptopurine was superior to methotrexate for maintenance of remission. In the study, 50% (7/14) of 6-mercaptopurine patients and 92% (11/12) of methotrexate patients failed to maintain remission (1 study, 26 patients; RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.95). All of the studies which used active comparators were open label. When placebo and active comparator studies were pooled to assess adverse events, there was no statistically significant difference between azathioprine and control in the incidence of adverse events. Nine per cent (11/127) of azathioprine patients experienced at least one adverse event compared to 2% (3/130) of placebo patients (5 studies, 257 patients; RR 2.82, 95% CI 0.99 to 8.01). Patients receiving azathioprine were at significantly increased risk of withdrawing due to adverse events. Eight per cent (8/101) of azathioprine patients withdrew due to adverse events compared to 0% (0/98) of control patients (5 studies, 199 patients; RR 5.43, 95% CI 1.02 to 28.75). Adverse events related to study medication included acute pancreatitis (3 cases) and significant bone marrow suppression (5 cases). Deaths, opportunistic infection or neoplasia were not reported.
Azathioprine therapy appears to be more effective than placebo for maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis. Azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine may be effective as maintenance therapy for patients who have failed or cannot tolerate mesalazine or sulfasalazine and for patients who require repeated courses of steroids. More research is needed to evaluate superiority over standard maintenance therapy, especially in the light of a potential for adverse events from azathioprine. This review updates the existing review of azathioprine and 6-mercaptopurine for maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis which was published in the Cochrane Library (Issue 1, 2007).
Severe asthma is a high-burden disease. Real-world data on mepolizumab in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma is needed to assess whether the data from randomised controlled trials are ...applicable in a broader population.The Australian Mepolizumab Registry (AMR) was established with an aim to assess the use, effectiveness and safety of mepolizumab for severe eosinophilic asthma in Australia.Patients (n=309) with severe eosinophilic asthma (median age 60 years, 58% female) commenced mepolizumab. They had poor symptom control (median Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ)-5 score of 3.4), frequent exacerbations (median three courses of oral corticosteroids (OCS) in the previous 12 months), and 47% required daily OCS. Median baseline peripheral blood eosinophil level was 590 cells·µL
Comorbidities were common: allergic rhinitis 63%, gastro-oesophageal reflux disease 52%, obesity 46%, nasal polyps 34%.Mepolizumab treatment reduced exacerbations requiring OCS compared with the previous year (annualised rate ratio 0.34 (95% CI 0.29-0.41); p<0.001) and hospitalisations (rate ratio 0.46 (95% CI 0.33-0.63); p<0.001). Treatment improved symptom control (median ACQ-5 reduced by 2.0 at 6 months), quality of life and lung function. Higher blood eosinophil levels (p=0.003) and later age of asthma onset (p=0.028) predicted a better ACQ-5 response to mepolizumab, whilst being male (p=0.031) or having body mass index ≥30 (p=0.043) predicted a lesser response. Super-responders (upper 25% of ACQ-5 responders, n=61, 24%) had a higher T2 disease burden and fewer comorbidities at baseline.Mepolizumab therapy effectively reduces the significant and long-standing disease burden faced by patients with severe eosinophilic asthma in a real-world setting.
Background
Safe and effective long‐term treatments that reduce the need for corticosteroids are needed for Crohn's disease. Although purine antimetabolites are moderately effective for maintenance of ...remission patients often relapse despite treatment with these agents. Methotrexate may provide a safe and effective alternative to more expensive maintenance treatment with TNF‐α antagonists. This review is an update of a previously published Cochrane review.
Objectives
To conduct a systematic review of randomized trials examining the efficacy and safety of methotrexate for maintenance of remission in Crohn's disease.
Search methods
The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PUBMED, EMBASE, and the Cochrane IBD/FBD Group Specialized Trials Register were searched from inception to June 9, 2014. Study references and review papers were also searched for additional trials.
Selection criteria
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared methotrexate to placebo or any other active intervention for maintenance of remission in Crohn's disease were eligible for inclusion.
Data collection and analysis
Two authors independently reviewed studies for eligibility, extracted data and assessed study quality using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients maintaining clinical remission as defined by the studies and expressed as a percentage of the total number of patients randomized (intention‐to‐treat analysis). We calculated the pooled risk ratio (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for dichotomous outcomes. The overall quality of the evidence supporting the primary outcome was assessed using the GRADE criteria.
Main results
Five studies (n = 333 patients) were included in the review. Three studies were judged to be at low risk of bias. Two studies were judged to be at high risk of bias due to blinding. Intramuscular methotrexate was superior to placebo for maintenance of remission at 40 weeks follow‐up. Sixty‐five per cent of patients in the intramuscular methotrexate group maintained remission compared to 39% of placebo patients (RR 1.67, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.67; 76 patients).The number needed to treat to prevent one relapse was four. A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of evidence supporting this outcome was moderate due to sparse data (40 events). There was no statistically significant difference in maintenance of remission at 36 weeks follow‐up between oral methotrexate (12.5 mg/week) and placebo. Ninety per cent of patients in the oral methotrexate group maintained remission compared to 67% of placebo patients (RR 1.67, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.67; 22 patients). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of evidence supporting this outcome was low due to very sparse data (17 events). A pooled analysis of two small studies (n = 50) showed no statistically significant difference in continued remission between oral methotrexate (12.5 mg to 15 mg/week) and 6‐mercaptopurine (1 mg/kg/day) for maintenance of remission. Seventy‐seven per cent of methotrexate patients maintained remission compared to 57% of 6‐mercaptopurine patients (RR 1.36, 95% CI 0.92 to 2.00). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of evidence supporting this outcome was very low due to high risk of bias in one study (no blinding) and very sparse data (33 events). One small (13 patients) poor quality study found no difference in continued remission between methotrexate and 5‐aminosalicylic acid (RR 2.62, 95% CI 0.23 to 29.79). A pooled analysis of two studies (n = 145) including one high quality trial (n = 126) found no statistically significant difference in maintenance of remission at 36 to 48 weeks between combination therapy (methotrexate and infliximab) and infliximab monotherapy. Fifty‐four percent of patients in the combination therapy group maintained remission compared to 53% of monotherapy patients (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.38, P = 0.95). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of evidence supporting this outcome was low due to high risk of bias in one study (no blinding) and sparse data (78 events). Adverse events were generally mild in nature and resolved upon discontinuation or with folic acid supplementation. Common adverse events included nausea and vomiting, symptoms of a cold, abdominal pain, headache, joint pain or arthralgia, and fatigue.
Authors' conclusions
Moderate quality evidence indicates that intramuscular methotrexate at a dose of 15 mg/week is superior to placebo for maintenance of remission in Crohn's disease. Intramuscular methotrexate appears to be safe. Low dose oral methotrexate (12.5 to 15 mg/week) does not appear to be effective for maintenance of remission in Crohn's disease. Combination therapy (methotrexate and infliximab) does not appear to be any more effective for maintenance of remission than infliximab monotherapy. The results for efficacy outcomes between methotrexate and 6‐mercaptopurine and methotrexate and 5‐aminosalicylic acid were uncertain. Large‐scale studies of methotrexate given orally at higher doses for maintenance of remission in Crohn’s disease may provide stronger evidence for the use of methotrexate in this manner.
Background
Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic inflammatory bowel disease. Corticosteroids and 5‐aminosalicylates are the most commonly used therapies. However, many patients require ...immunosuppressive therapy for steroid‐refractory and steroid‐dependent disease. Methotrexate is a medication that is effective for treating a variety of inflammatory diseases, including Crohn's disease. This review was performed to determine the effectiveness of methotrexate treatment in UC patients. This review is an update of a previously published Cochrane review.
Objectives
To assess the efficacy and safety of methotrexate for induction of remission in patients with UC.
Search methods
MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL and the Cochrane IBD/FBD group specialized trials register were searched from from inception to June 26, 2014. Study references and review papers were also searched for additional trials. s from major gastroenterological meetings were searched to identify research published in form only.
Selection criteria
Randomized controlled trials comparing methotrexate with placebo or an active comparator in patients with active ulcerative colitis were considered for inclusion.
Data collection and analysis
Two authors independently reviewed studies for eligibility, extracted data and assessed study quality using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients who achieved clinical remission and withdrawal from steroids as defined by the studies and expressed as a percentage of the total number of patients randomized (intention‐to‐treat analysis). We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for dichotomous outcomes. The overall quality of the evidence supporting the primary outcome was assessed using the GRADE criteria.
Main results
Two studies (n = 101 patients) were included in the review. One study (n = 67) compared oral methotrexate 12.5 mg/week) to placebo. The other study (n = 34) compared oral methotrexate (15 mg/week) to 6‐mercaptopurine (1.5 mg/kg/day) and 5‐aminosalicylic acid (3 g/day). The placebo‐controlled study was judged to be at low risk of bias. The other study was judged to be at high risk of bias due to an open‐label design. There was no statistically significant difference in clinical remission rates between methotrexate and placebo patients. Forty‐seven per cent (14/30) of methotrexate patients achieved clinical remission and complete withdrawal from steroids during the study period compared to 49% (18/37) of placebo patients (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.59. A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of the evidence supporting this outcome was low due to very sparse data (32 events). There were no statistically significant differences in the proportion of patients who achieved clinical remission and withdrawal from steroids in the study comparing oral methotrexate to 6‐mercaptopurine and 5‐aminosalicylic acid. At 30 weeks, 58% (7/12) of methotrexate patients achieved clinical remission and withdrawal from steroids compared to 79% (11/14) of 6‐mercaptopurine patients (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.29) and 25% of 5‐aminosalicylic acid patients (RR 2.33, 95% CI 0.64 to 8.49). GRADE analyses indicated that the overall quality of the evidence was very low due to very sparse data (18 and 9 events respectively) and and high risk of bias. In the placebo‐controlled trial two patients (7%) were withdrawn from the methotrexate group due to adverse events (leucopenia, migraine) compared to one patient (3%) who had a rash in the placebo group (RR 2.47, 95% CI 0.23 to 25.91). Adverse events experienced by methotrexate patients in the active comparator study included nausea and dyspepsia, mild alopecia, mild increase in aspartate aminotransferase levels, peritoneal abscess, hypoalbuminemia, severe rash and atypical pneumonia.
Authors' conclusions
Although methotrexate was well‐tolerated, the studies showed no benefit for methotrexate over placebo or active comparators. The results for efficacy outcomes between methotrexate and placebo, methotrexate and 6‐mercaptopurine and methotrexate and 5‐aminosalicylic acid were uncertain. Whether a higher dose or parenteral administration would be effective for induction therapy is unknown. At present there is no evidence supporting the use of methotrexate for induction of remission in active ulcerative colitis. A trial in which larger numbers of patients receive a higher dose of oral methotrexate should be considered. Currently there are two large ongoing placebo‐controlled trials (METEOR and MERIT‐UC) assessing the efficacy and safety of intramuscular or subcutaneous methotrexate in patients with active UC which may help resolve the evidence supporting the use of methotrexate as therapy for active of ulcerative colitis.
Maintenance therapy for Crohn disease features the use of immunosuppressive drugs, which are associated with an increased risk of infection. Identification of safe and effective maintenance ...strategies is a priority.
To determine whether the oral administration of omega-3 free fatty acids is more effective than placebo for prevention of relapse of Crohn disease.
Two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies (Epanova Program in Crohn's Study 1 EPIC-1 and EPIC-2) conducted between January 2003 and February 2007 at 98 centers in Canada, Europe, Israel, and the United States. Data from 363 and 375 patients with quiescent Crohn disease were evaluated in EPIC-1 and EPIC-2, respectively.
Patients with a Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) score of less than 150 were randomly assigned to receive either 4 g/d of omega-3 free fatty acids or placebo for up to 58 weeks. No other treatments for Crohn disease were permitted.
Clinical relapse, as defined by a CDAI score of 150 points or greater and an increase of more than 70 points from the baseline value, or initiation of treatment for active Crohn disease.
For EPIC-1, 188 patients were assigned to receive omega-3 free fatty acids and 186 patients to receive placebo. Corresponding numbers for EPIC-2 were 189 and 190 patients, respectively. The rate of relapse at 1 year in EPIC-1 was 31.6% in patients who received omega-3 free fatty acids and 35.7% in those who received placebo (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.51-1.19; P = .30). Corresponding values for EPIC-2 were 47.8% and 48.8% (hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.67-1.21; P = .48). Serious adverse events were uncommon and mostly related to Crohn disease.
In these trials, treatment with omega-3 free fatty acids was not effective for the prevention of relapse in Crohn disease.
clinicaltrials.gov Identifiers: EPIC-1: NCT00613197, EPIC-2: NCT00074542.
Background & Aims Methotrexate and infliximab are effective therapies for Crohn's disease (CD). In the combination of maintenance methotrexate-infliximab trial, we evaluated the potential superiority ...of combination therapy over infliximab alone. Methods In a 50-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we compared methotrexate and infliximab with infliximab alone in 126 patients with CD who had initiated prednisone induction therapy (15–40 mg/day) within the preceding 6 weeks. Patients were assigned randomly to groups given methotrexate at an initial weekly dose of 10 mg, escalating to 25 mg/week (n = 63), or placebo (n = 63). Both groups received infliximab (5 mg/kg of body weight) at weeks 1, 3, 7, and 14, and every 8 weeks thereafter. Prednisone was tapered, beginning at week 1, and discontinued no later than week 14. The primary outcome was time to treatment failure, defined as a lack of prednisone-free remission (CD Activity Index, <150) at week 14 or failure to maintain remission through week 50. Results Patients' baseline characteristics were similar between groups. By week 50, the actuarial rate of treatment failure was 30.6% in the combination therapy group compared with 29.8% in the infliximab monotherapy group ( P = .63; hazard ratio, 1.16; 95% confidence interval, 0.62–2.17). Prespecified subgroup analyses failed to show a benefit in patients with short disease duration or an increased level of C-reactive protein. No clinically meaningful differences were observed in secondary outcomes. Combination therapy was well tolerated. Conclusions The combination of infliximab and methotrexate, although safe, was no more effective than infliximab alone in patients with CD receiving treatment with prednisone. ClincialTrials.gov number, NCT00132899.
To conduct a systematic review to determine effective treatments for patients with collagenous colitis or lymphocytic colitis, the two subtypes of microscopic colitis.
Relevant papers were identified ...via the MEDLINE, PUBMED, and Cochrane Collaboration databases, manual searches of the references of identified papers and review papers on microscopic colitis, as well as searches of abstracts from major gastroenterological meetings.
All studies assessing treatment of microscopic colitis had relatively small sample sizes. A total of 10 randomized trials included patients with collagenous colitis. Budesonide was studied for induction of response in three trials and for maintenance of response in two trials. The pooled odds ratio for inducing clinical response with budesonide was 12.32 (95% confidence interval, CI 5.53-27.46), and for maintaining clinical response was 8.82 (95% CI 3.19-24.37), with a number needed to treat (NNT) of 2 patients for each outcome. Budesonide also induced and maintained histological response and was well tolerated. Bismuth subsalicylate, prednisolone, and mesalamine with or without cholestyramine may be effective, whereas Boswellia serrata extract and probiotics were ineffective for treating collagenous colitis. Three randomized trials included patients with lymphocytic colitis. Budesonide was shown in one study to be effective for inducing clinical response (OR 9.00; 95% CI 1.98-40.93), with an NNT of three patients. Budesonide also induced histological response and was well tolerated. Bismuth subsalicylate and mesalamine with or without cholestyramine may be effective for treating lymphocytic colitis. No trials assessed maintenance of response in patients with lymphocytic colitis.
Budesonide is effective and well tolerated for inducing and maintaining clinical and histological responses in patients with collagenous colitis, and for inducing clinical and histological responses in patients with lymphocytic colitis. Determining the magnitude of benefit is limited by the small sample sizes of the studies. The evidence for other agents, including bismuth subsalicylate, prednisolone, B. serrata extract, probiotics, and mesalamine with or without cholestyramine is weaker. It is not clear that any of these agents induce or maintain actual remission of collagenous or lymphocytic colitis, as opposed to clinical or histological response.
The Horizontal Wind Model (HWM) has been updated in the thermosphere with new observations and formulation changes. These new data are ground‐based 630 nm Fabry‐Perot Interferometer (FPI) ...measurements in the equatorial and polar regions, as well as cross‐track winds from the Gravity Field and Steady State Ocean Circulation Explorer (GOCE) satellite. The GOCE wind observations provide valuable wind data in the twilight regions. The ground‐based FPI measurements fill latitudinal data gaps in the prior observational database. Construction of this reference model also provides the opportunity to compare these new measurements. The resulting update (HWM14) provides an improved time‐dependent, observationally based, global empirical specification of the upper atmospheric general circulation patterns and migrating tides. In basic agreement with existing accepted theoretical knowledge of the thermosphere general circulation, additional calculations indicate that the empirical wind specifications are self‐consistent with climatological ionosphere plasma distribution and electric field patterns.
Key Points
The horizontal wind model has been updated
New data fill observational gaps
Empirical specifications are consistent with ionospheric models
PDF
