Alverine citrate fails to relieve the symptoms of irritable bowel syndrome: results of a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial

Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology Lectureship Dubai 2022 : Management of Irritable Bowel Syndrome With Diarrhea

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) with diarrhea (IBS-D) affects ~1% of the general population and is characterized by abdominal pain associated with diarrhea. IBS-D symptoms significantly impact the quality of life of patients. Major uncertainties remain regarding the optimal management of these patients. Several therapies have been investigated over the years for the treatment of IBS-D. In the initial management, commonly prescribed approaches with an effect on global IBS symptoms include a low Fermentable Oligo-, Di-, Mono-Saccharides and Polyols diet and probiotics, while antispasmodics are used for targeting abdominal pain and loperamide for diarrhea only. Additional therapeutic options for the relief of global IBS symptoms include rifaximin, 5-HT 3 antagonists, gut-directed psychological therapies, and eluxadoline, while tricyclic antidepressants can target abdominal pain and bile acid sequestrants diarrhea. Promising evidence exists for the use of mesalazine and fecal microbiota transplantation in IBS-D, although further evidence is needed for definitive conclusions regarding their efficacy.

Alverine citrate promotes myogenic differentiation and ameliorates muscle atrophy

Sarcopenia is the age-related loss of muscle mass and function and no pharmacological medication has been approved for its treatment. We established an atrogin-1/MAFbx promoter assay to find drug candidates that inhibit myotube atrophy. Alverine citrate (AC) was identified using high-throughput screening of an existing drug library. AC is an established medicine for stomach and intestinal spasms. AC treatment increased myotube diameter and inhibited atrophy signals induced by either C26-conditioned medium or dexamethasone in cultured C2C12 myoblasts. AC also enhanced myoblast fusion through the upregulation of fusion-related genes during C2C12 myoblast differentiation. Oral administration of AC improves muscle mass and physical performance in aged mice, as well as hindlimb-disused mice. Taken together, our data suggest that AC may be a novel therapeutic candidate for improving muscle weakness, including sarcopenia.

Antispasmodics for Chronic Abdominal Pain: Analysis of North American Treatment Options

Chronic abdominal pain is a common gastrointestinal (GI) symptom that characterizes many functional GI disorders/disorders of gut-brain interaction, including irritable bowel syndrome, functional dyspepsia, and centrally mediated abdominal pain syndrome. The symptoms of abdominal pain in these highly prevalent disorders are often treated with antispasmodic agents. Antispasmodic treatment includes a broad range of therapeutic classes with different mechanisms of action, including anticholinergic/antimuscarinic agents (inhibition of GI smooth muscle contraction), calcium channel inhibitors (inhibition of calcium transport into GI smooth muscle), and direct smooth muscle relaxants (inhibition of sodium and calcium transport). The aim of this review article was to examine the efficacy and safety of antispasmodics available in North America (e.g., alverine, dicyclomine, hyoscine, hyoscyamine, mebeverine, otilonium, pinaverium, and trimebutine) for the treatment of chronic abdominal pain in patients with common disorders of gut-brain interaction. For the agents examined, comparisons of studies are limited by inconsistencies in treatment dosing and duration, patient profiles, and diagnostic criteria employed. Furthermore, variability in study end points limits comparisons. Risk of selection, performance, detection, attrition, and reporting bias also differed among studies, and in many cases, risks were considered "unclear." The antispasmodics evaluated in this review, which differ in geographic availability, were found to vary dramatically in efficacy and safety. Given these caveats, each agent should be considered on an individual basis, rather than prescribed based on information across the broad class of agents.

Chinese herbal medicine versus antispasmodics in the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) is gaining popularity in treating irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). Although its efficacy was shown in recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs), it is rarely compared with antispasmodics to confirm its effectiveness. We aimed to resolve this uncertainty through a network meta-analysis.

METHODS

We searched for RCTs that compared CHM or antispasmodics with placebo or one of them in the treatment of IBS. The primary outcomes were adequate relief of global IBS symptoms and abdominal pain. The data were pooled using a random-effects model. The effect size measure was pooled relative risk (RR), and treatments were ranked according to their P-scores.

KEY RESULTS

We included 57 RCTs (n = 8869). After completion of treatment, drotaverine, individual CHM, otilonium, cimetropium, standard CHM, and pinaverium were efficacious in adequate relief of global IBS symptoms, and drotaverine ranked the first (RR, 2.33 [95% CI, 1.31-4.14], P-score =0.91); no difference was found between these treatments. After completion of treatment, drotaverine, standard CHM, pinaverium, and individual CHM were efficacious in abdominal pain, and drotaverine ranked the first (RR, 2.71 [95% CI, 1.69-4.36], P-score =0.91); no difference was found between these treatments. Standard CHM had significantly more adverse events than placebo (RR, 1.82 [95% CI, 1.12-2.94]) and other treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

CHM and antispasmodics were efficacious for improvement of global IBS symptoms and abdominal pain. The adverse events of CHM were higher than antispasmodics; however, the heterogeneity of CHM formulas and the very low quality of the evidence warrants further investigation.

The placebo response rate in pharmacological trials in patients with irritable bowel syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials in irritable bowel syndrome are associated with high placebo response rates. We aimed to identify the magnitude of the placebo response and the contributing factors to this occurrence.

METHODS

We did a systematic review and meta-analysis with a search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials between April 1, 1959, and April 30, 2020. We included all randomised controlled trials that compared an active pharmacotherapeutic agent with placebo and had a dichotomous outcome of response to therapy (in terms of global improvement or improvement in abdominal pain) in adults (aged ≥18 years) with irritable bowel syndrome. Exclusion criteria were trials reporting on treatment satisfaction as a dichotomous outcome of response to therapy or clinician-reported outcomes and a treatment duration of less than 4 weeks. Our main outcome was identification of the magnitude of the pooled placebo response rate for the following endpoints: global improvement, abdominal pain, and US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) endpoints. We extracted information from published reports and pooled proportions through meta-analysis with random effects. The study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020170908.

FINDINGS

Of the 6863 publications identified, 70 articles describing 73 randomised controlled trials were included in our analysis. The pooled placebo response rate was 27·3% (95% CI 24·3-30·9) using the global improvement endpoint, 34·4% (31·2-37·8) using the abdominal pain endpoint, and 17·9% (15·2-21·0) using the composite FDA endpoint responder definition, all with substantial heterogeneity between the trials. Studies published before 2006, and those done in Europe, with a parallel design, a run-in period of 2 weeks or less, a dose schedule of three times a day or more, or a smaller sample size of the control group were significantly associated with an increased pooled placebo response rate.

INTERPRETATION

More than a quarter of patients with irritable bowel syndrome had a placebo response in terms of global improvement, with multiple associated moderators. We recommend future trials apply a run-in period of at least 2 weeks and dose once or twice a day to minimise the placebo response rate.

FUNDING

None.

Anti-Inflammatory Functions of Alverine via Targeting Src in the NF-κB Pathway

Alverine, a smooth muscle relaxant, is used to relieve cramps or spasms of the stomach and intestine. Although the effects of alverine on spontaneous and induced contractile activity are well known, its anti-inflammatory activity has not been fully evaluated. In this study, we investigated the anti-inflammatory effects of alverine in vitro and in vivo. The production of nitric oxide (NO) in RAW264.7 cells activated by lipopolysaccharide (LPS) or polyinosinic:polycytidylic acid (poly (I:C)) was reduced by alverine. The mRNA expression of inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS), cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2), and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) was also dose-dependently inhibited by treatment with alverine. In reporter gene assays, alverine clearly decreased luciferase activity, mediated by the transcription factor nuclear factor κB (NF-κB) in TIR-domain-containing adapter-inducing interferon-β (TRIF)- or MyD88-overexpressing HEK293 cells. Additionally, phosphorylation of NF-κB subunits and upstream signaling molecules, including p65, p50, AKT, IκBα, and Src was downregulated by 200 μM of alverine in LPS-treated RAW264.7 cells. Using immunoblotting and cellular thermal shift assays (CETSAs), Src was identified as the target of alverine in its anti-inflammatory response. In addition, HCl/EtOH-stimulated gastric ulcers in mice were ameliorated by alverine at doses of 100 and 200 mg/kg. In conclusion, alverine reduced inflammatory responses by targeting Src in the NF-κB pathway, and these findings provide new insights into the development of anti-inflammatory drugs.

Guidelines on the management of irritable bowel syndrome: In memory of Professor Witold Bartnik

These guidelines constitute an update of the previous "Recommendations on the management of irritable bowel syndrome" issued in 2008. They have been developed by a Task Force organized by the Governing Board of the Polish Society of Gastroenterology. They discuss, with particular emphasis on new scientific data covering papers published since 2008, the aetiology, epidemiology, clinical presentation, diagnostic principles and criteria for the diagnosis, and recommendations for the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). The English-language acronym for the syndrome (IBS) has become popular in medical and popular scientific language. It is also widely recognized by patients who identify with this diagnosis. Therefore, in the discussed guidelines, this is what we will use.

Abdominal bloating: pathophysiology and treatment

Abdominal bloating is a very common and troublesome symptom of all ages, but it has not been fully understood to date. Bloating is usually associated with functional gastrointestinal disorders or organic diseases, but it may also appear alone. The pathophysiology of bloating remains ambiguous, although some evidences support the potential mechanisms, including gut hypersensitivity, impaired gas handling, altered gut microbiota, and abnormal abdominal-phrenic reflexes. Owing to the insufficient understanding of these mechanisms, the available therapeutic options are limited. However, medical treatment with some prokinetics, rifaximin, lubiprostone and linaclotide could be considered in the treatment of bloating. In addition, dietary intervention is important in relieving symptom in patients with bloating.

Identification of alverine and benfluorex as HNF4α activators

The principal finding of this study is that two drugs, alverine and benfluorex, used in vastly different clinical settings, activated the nuclear receptor transcription factor HNF4α. Both were hits in a high-throughput screen for compounds that reversed the inhibitory effect of the fatty acid palmitate on human insulin promoter activity. Alverine is used in the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome, while benfluorex (Mediator) was used to treat hyperlipidemia and type II diabetes. Benfluorex was withdrawn from the market recently because of serious cardiovascular side effects related to fenfluramine-like activity. Strikingly, alverine and benfluorex have a previously unrecognized structural similarity, consistent with a common mechanism of action. Gene expression and biochemical studies revealed that they both activate HNF4α. This novel mechanism of action should lead to a reinterpretation of previous studies with these drugs and suggests a path toward the development of therapies for diseases such as inflammatory bowel and diabetes that may respond to HNF4α activators.

Effect of antispasmodic agents, alone or in combination, in the treatment of Irritable Bowel Syndrome: systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is characterized by recurrent abdominal pain, bloating, and changes in bowel habit.

AIMS

To determine the clinical effectiveness of the antispasmodic agents available in Mexico for the treatment of IBS.

METHODS

We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials on antispasmodic agents for IBS treatment. Clinical trials identified from January 1960 to May 2011 were searched for in MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and in the ClinicalTrials.gov registry. Treatment response was evaluated by global improvement of symptoms or abdominal pain, abdominal distention/bloating, and frequency of adverse events. The effect of antispasmodics vs placebo was expressed in OR and 95% CI.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies were identified, 23 of which fulfilled inclusion criteria. The studied agents were pinaverium bromide, mebeverine, otilonium, trimebutine, alverine, hyoscine, alverine/simethicone, pinaverium/simethicone, fenoverine, and dicyclomine. A total of 2585 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Global improvement was 1.55 (CI 95%: 1.33 to 1.83). Otilonium and the alverine/simethicone combination produced significant values in global improvement while the pinaverium/simethicone combination showed improvement in bloating. As for pain, 2394 patients were included with an OR of 1.52 (IC 95%: 1.28 a 1.80), favoring antispasmodics.

CONCLUSIONS

Antispasmodics were more effective than placebo in IBS, without any significant adverse events. The addition of simethicone improved the properties of the antispasmodic agents, as seen with the alverine/simethicone and pinaverium/simethicone combinations.

Inclusion of a spasmolytic in bowel cleansing: a prospective randomized study

The quality of colon cleansing and the tolerance of patients to the procedure are two major determinants of the quality of a colonoscopy. Many bowel-cleansing regimens are known, but there is no ideal regimen. Alverine citrate (Relaxyl, Spasmonal) is a spasmolytic agent that has been shown to affect responses of mechanoreceptors of the intestine to both mechanical and chemical stimuli. Patients who underwent colonoscopies at four centers were randomly assigned two different bowel-cleansing procedures. The bowel-cleansing methods were oral sodium phosphate (NaP) (Group I) and oral NaP plus alverine citrate (Group II). Patients were randomized into one of these regimens. The quality of colon cleansing was assessed by an endoscopist with an empirical, clinically meaningful 3-point scale. Both groups were similar with respect to age, gender, and pre- and postcolonoscopic diagnosis. In Group I, 76 patients (47 women and 29 men; aged 39.53 ± 7.87 years) and in Group II, 71 patients (41 women and 30 men; aged 39.78 ± 8.27 years) were included in the study. In Groups I and II, 37 (48.7%) and 41 (57.7%) patients had perfect bowel cleansing, respectively. The overall colon cleansing in the group with NaP plus alverine citrate was comparable with that in the NaP group. The tolerability of patients to the colonoscopy in the two groups was also similar. Based on the present data, adding oral alverine citrate to NaP does not increase either the quality of bowel cleansing or the tolerance of patients to the procedure.

Bulking agents, antispasmodics and antidepressants for the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome

BACKGROUND

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a common chronic gastrointestinal disorder. The role of pharmacotherapy for IBS is limited and focused mainly on symptom control.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the efficacy of bulking agents, antispasmodics and antidepressants for the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Computer assisted structured searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane library, CINAHL and PsychInfo were conducted for the years 1966-2009. An updated search in April 2011 identified 10 studies which will be considered for inclusion in a future update of this review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials comparing bulking agents, antispasmodics or antidepressants with a placebo treatment in patients with irritable bowel syndrome aged over 12 years were considered for inclusion. Only studies published as full papers were included. Studies were not excluded on the basis of language. The primary outcome had to include improvement of abdominal pain, global assessment or symptom score.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted data from the selected studies. Risk Ratios (RR) and Standardized Mean Differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. A proof of practice analysis was conducted including sub-group analyses for different types of  bulking agents, spasmolytic agents or antidepressant medication. This was followed by a proof of principle analysis where only the studies with adequate allocation concealment were included.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 56 studies (3725 patients) were included in this review. These included 12 studies of bulking agents (621 patients), 29 of antispasmodics (2333 patients), and 15 of antidepressants (922 patients). The risk of bias was low for most items. However, selection bias is unclear for many of the included studies because the methods used for randomization and allocation concealment were not described. No beneficial effect for bulking agents over placebo was found for improvement of abdominal pain (4 studies; 186 patients; SMD 0.03; 95% CI -0.34 to 0.40; P = 0.87), global assessment (11 studies; 565 patients; RR 1.10; 95% CI 0.91 to 1.33; P = 0.32) or symptom score (3 studies; 126 patients SMD -0.00; 95% CI -0.43 to 0.43; P = 1.00). Subgroup analyses for insoluble and soluble fibres also showed no statistically significant benefit. Separate analysis of the studies with adequate concealment of allocation did not change these results. There was a beneficial effect for antispasmodics over placebo for improvement of abdominal pain (58% of antispasmodic patients improved compared to 46% of placebo; 13 studies; 1392 patients; RR 1.32; 95% CI 1.12 to 1.55; P < 0.001; NNT = 7), global assessment (57% of antispasmodic patients improved compared to 39% of placebo; 22 studies; 1983 patients; RR 1.49; 95% CI 1.25 to 1.77; P < 0.0001; NNT = 5) and symptom score (37% of antispasmodic patients improved compared to 22% of placebo; 4 studies; 586 patients; RR 1.86; 95% CI 1.26 to 2.76; P < 0.01; NNT = 3). Subgroup analyses for different types of antispasmodics found statistically significant benefits for cimteropium/ dicyclomine, peppermint oil, pinaverium and trimebutine. Separate analysis of the studies with adequate allocation concealment found a significant benefit for improvement of abdominal pain. There was a beneficial effect for antidepressants over placebo for improvement of abdominal pain (54% of antidepressants patients improved compared to 37% of placebo; 8 studies; 517 patients; RR 1.49; 95% CI 1.05 to 2.12; P = 0.03; NNT = 5), global assessment (59% of antidepressants patients improved compared to 39% of placebo; 11 studies; 750 patients; RR 1.57; 95% CI 1.23 to 2.00; P < 0.001; NNT = 4) and symptom score (53% of antidepressants patients improved compared to 26% of placebo; 3 studies; 159 patients; RR 1.99; 95% CI 1.32 to 2.99; P = 0.001; NNT = 4). Subgroup analyses showed a statistically significant benefit for selective serotonin releasing inhibitors (SSRIs) for improvement of  global assessment and for tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) for improvement of abdominal pain and symptom score. Separate analysis of studies with adequate allocation concealment found a significant benefit for improvement of symptom score and global assessment. Adverse events were not assessed as an outcome in this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence that bulking agents are effective for treating IBS.  There is evidence that antispasmodics are effective for the treatment of IBS. The individual subgroups which are effective include: cimetropium/dicyclomine, peppermint oil, pinaverium and trimebutine. There is good evidence that antidepressants are effective for the treatment of IBS. The subgroup analyses for SSRIs and TCAs are unequivocal and their effectiveness may depend on the individual patient. Future research should use rigorous methodology and valid outcome measures.

Peripherally acting therapies for the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome

Gut-acting therapies are common therapies for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). Most of these peripheral acting agents are primarily targeted at individual symptoms. The evidence supporting the use of these agents in IBS is largely anecdotal. Serotonergic agents and the chloride channel activator lubiprostone have shown efficacy in treating symptoms of IBS. The clinical evidence supporting the use of these agents is based on data from high-quality clinical trials. The use of serotonergic agents for IBS in the United States is limited to the 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 antagonist alosetron in the treatment of women with severe IBS with diarrhea refractory to traditional therapy.

Meta-analysis: factors affecting placebo response rate in the irritable bowel syndrome

BACKGROUND

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a functional disorder of the gastrointestinal tract with a significant placebo response.

AIM

To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis examining the magnitude of placebo response rate in treatment trials for IBS.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane central register of controlled trials were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing pharmacological therapies with placebo in adult IBS patients. Studies reported either global assessment of IBS symptom cure or improvement or abdominal pain cure or improvement. Data were extracted as intention-to-treat analyses with drop-outs assumed to be treatment failures and pooled using a random-effects model. Proportion of placebo patients experiencing symptom improvement or resolution was reported with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Effect of trial characteristics on magnitude of placebo response was examined.

RESULTS

In all, 73 RCTs were eligible, including 8364 patients with IBS allocated to placebo. Pooled placebo response rate across all RCTs was 37.5% (95% CI 34.4-40.6%). Rates were higher in European RCTs, RCTs that used physician-reported outcomes and RCTs using shorter duration of therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Placebo response rates across RCTs of pharmacological therapies in IBS were high. Future research should identify patient characteristics predicting placebo response.

Errors in the conduct of systematic reviews of pharmacological interventions for irritable bowel syndrome

OBJECTIVES

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are integral to evidence-based clinical decision making. Although flawed systematic reviews could compromise optimal decision making, their accuracy has received limited investigation. We assessed conduct of systematic reviews of pharmaceutical interventions for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS).

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (up to June 2008) to identify and replicate all published systematic reviews and meta-analyses that examined pharmacological interventions for IBS. We identified trials appropriately and inappropriately included according to the investigators' own eligibility criteria and eligible trials the investigators failed to include, and assessed the accuracy of dichotomous data extraction from all truly eligible trials. We conducted meta-analyses of accurate data from all truly eligible trials, and examined the differences between these accurate estimates and those reported by the authors.

RESULTS

The search strategy identified 120 citations, and 13 appeared to be relevant. Five systematic reviews did not extract dichotomous data, leaving eight eligible for inclusion. In five of the eight meta-analyses 13-29% of included trials were ineligible according to investigators' criteria, constituting 8-26% of included patients. Six of the meta-analyses missed 17 separate published eligible trials; 3-11% of eligible patients were, as a result, not included. All eight meta-analyses contained errors in dichotomous data extraction, in 29-100% of truly eligible trials, leading to errors in 15 of 16 reported pooled treatment effects. There was a > or =10% relative difference in treatment effects between the reported and recalculated summary statistic in five (31%) cases, and a change in the statistical significance of the recalculated summary statistic in a further four (25%) cases.

CONCLUSIONS

We found many errors in both application of eligibility criteria and dichotomous data extraction in the eight meta-analyses studied. Independent verification of systematic reviews and meta-analyses may be required for full confidence in their results.

The placebo effect in irritable bowel syndrome trials: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite the apparent high placebo response rate in randomized placebo-controlled trials (RCT) of patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), little is known about the variability and predictors of this response.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the magnitude of response in placebo arms of IBS clinical trials and to identify which factors predict the variability of the placebo response.

METHODS

We performed a meta-analysis of published, English language, RCT with 20 or more IBS patients who were treated for at least 2 weeks. This analysis is limited to studies that assessed global response (improvement in overall symptoms). The variables considered as potential placebo modifiers were study design, study duration, use of a run-in phase, Jadad score, entry criteria, number of office visits, number of office visits/study duration, use of diagnostic testing, gender, age and type of medication studied.

FINDINGS

Forty-five placebo-controlled RCTs met the inclusion criteria. The placebo response ranged from 16.0 to 71.4% with a population-weighted average of 40.2%, 95% CI (35.9-44.4). Significant associations with lower placebo response rates were fulfillment of the Rome criteria for study entry (P=0.049) and an increased number of office visits (P=0.026).

CONCLUSIONS

Placebo effects in IBS clinical trials measuring a global outcome are highly variable. Entry criteria and number of office visits are significant predictors of the placebo response. More stringent entry criteria and an increased number of office visits appear to independently decrease the placebo response.

Management of irritable bowel syndrome

The diagnosis of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is made on clinical grounds with appropriate limited investigations to exclude organic disease. IBS is common and may have a significant impact on a patient's quality of life. Psychological symptoms are common. IBS may benefit from pharmacological and non-pharmacological management. Specific measures should be directed towards the dominant symptoms of constipation or diarrhoea. Several new drugs are currently under evaluation and may prove valuable for subgroups of patients with IBS. Successful management requires a combination of reassurance and explanation about the natural history of the condition.