Libertas: rationale and study design of a multicentre, Phase II, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled investigation to evaluate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of locally applied NRL001 in patients with faecal incontinence

Role of adrenergic receptor signalling in neuroimmune communication

Neuroimmune communication plays a crucial role in maintaining homeostasis and promptly responding to any foreign insults. Sympathetic nerve fibres are innervated into all the lymphoid organs (bone marrow, thymus, spleen, and lymph nodes) and provide a communication link between the central nervous system (CNS) and ongoing immune response in the tissue microenvironment. Neurotransmitters such as catecholamines (epinephrine and norepinephrine) bind to adrenergic receptors present on most immune and non-immune cells, establish a local neuroimmune-communication system, and help regulate the ongoing immune response. The activation of these receptors varies with the type of receptor-activated, target cell, the activation status of the cells, and timing of activation. Activating adrenergic receptors, specifically β-adrenergic signalling in immune cells leads to activation of the cAMP-PKA pathway or other non-canonical pathways. It predominantly leads to immune suppression such as inhibition of IL-2 secretion and a decrease in macrophages phagocytosis. This review discusses the expression of different adrenergic receptors in various immune cells, signalling, and how it modulates immune cell function and contributes to health and diseases. Understanding the neuroimmune communication through adrenergic receptor signalling in immune cells could help to design better strategies to control inflammation and autoimmunity.

•

Primary and secondary lymphoid organs are innervated with sympathetic nerve fibres.

•

Adrenergic receptor expression on immune and non-immune cells establishes a local neuroimmune communication system.

•

Adrenergic receptor signalling in immune cells controls the differentiation and function of various immune cells.

•

Modulating adrenergic receptor signalling with a specific agonist or antagonist also affect the immune response.

Tools for fecal incontinence assessment: lessons for inflammatory bowel disease trials based on a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Fecal incontinence is a disabling condition affecting up to 20% of women.

OBJECTIVE

We investigated fecal incontinence assessment in both inflammatory bowel disease and non-inflammatory bowel disease patients to propose a diagnostic approach for inflammatory bowel disease trials.

METHODS

We searched on Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane Library for all studies on adult inflammatory bowel disease and non-inflammatory bowel disease patients reporting data on fecal incontinence assessment from January 2009 to December 2019.

RESULTS

In total, 328 studies were included; 306 studies enrolled non-inflammatory bowel disease patients and 22 studies enrolled inflammatory bowel disease patients. In non-inflammatory bowel disease trials the most used tools were the Wexner score, fecal incontinence quality of life questionnaire, Vaizey score and fecal incontinence severity index (in 187, 91, 62 and 33 studies). Anal manometry was adopted in 41.2% and endoanal ultrasonography in 34.0% of the studies. In 142 studies (46.4%) fecal incontinence evaluation was performed with a single instrument, while in 64 (20.9%) and 100 (32.7%) studies two or more instruments were used. In inflammatory bowel disease studies the Wexner score, Vaizey score and inflammatory bowel disease quality of life questionnaire were the most commonly adopted tools (in five (22.7%), five (22.7%) and four (18.2%) studies). Anal manometry and endoanal ultrasonography were performed in 45.4% and 18.2% of the studies.

CONCLUSION

Based on prior validation and experience, we propose to use the Wexner score as the first step for fecal incontinence assessment in inflammatory bowel disease trials. Anal manometry and/or endoanal ultrasonography should be taken into account in the case of positive questionnaires.

Randomized clinical trials with run-in periods: frequency, characteristics and reporting

Background

Run-in periods are occasionally used in randomized clinical trials to exclude patients after inclusion, but before randomization. In theory, run-in periods increase the probability of detecting a potential treatment effect, at the cost of possibly affecting external and internal validity. Adequate reporting of exclusions during the run-in period is a prerequisite for judging the risk of compromised validity. Our study aims were to assess the proportion of randomized clinical trials with run-in periods, to characterize such trials and the types of run-in periods and to assess their reporting.

Materials and methods

This was an observational study of 470 PubMed-indexed randomized controlled trial publications from 2014. We compared trials with and without run-in periods, described the types of run-in periods and evaluated the completeness of their reporting by noting whether publications stated the number of excluded patients, reasons for exclusion and baseline characteristics of the excluded patients.

Results

Twenty-five trials reported a run-in period (5%). These were larger than other trials (median number of randomized patients 217 vs 90, P=0.01) and more commonly industry trials (11% vs 3%, P<0.01). The run-in procedures varied in design and purpose. In 23 out of 25 trials (88%), the run-in period was incompletely reported, mostly due to missing baseline characteristics.

Conclusion

Approximately 1 in 20 trials used run-in periods, though much more frequently in industry trials. Reporting of the run-in period was often incomplete, precluding a meaningful assessment of the impact of the run-in period on the validity of trial results. We suggest that current trials with run-in periods are interpreted with caution and that updates of reporting guidelines for randomized trials address the issue.

Libertas: a phase II placebo-controlled study of NRL001 in patients with faecal incontinence showed an unexpected and sustained placebo response

PURPOSE

Faecal incontinence (FI) is distressing, significantly reduces quality of life (QoL) and has few pharmacological treatments. The α1-adrenoceptor agonist NRL001 (1R,2S-methoxamine hydrochloride) improves anal sphincter tone. NRL001 efficacy was evaluated by changes in Wexner scores at week 4 vs. baseline in NRL001-treated patients compared with placebo. Impact of NRL001 on QoL and safety were also assessed.

METHODS

Four hundred sixty-six patients received NRL001 (5, 7.5 or 10 mg) or placebo as suppository, once daily over 8 weeks. Wexner score, Vaizey score and QoL were analysed at baseline, week 4 and week 8. FI episodes and adverse events were recorded in diaries.

RESULTS

At week 4, mean reductions in Wexner scores were -3.0, -2.6, -2.6 and -2.4 for NRL001 5, 7.5, 10 mg and placebo, respectively. All reduced further by week 8. As placebo responses also improved, there was no significant treatment effect at week 4 (p = 0.6867) or week 8 (p = 0.5005). FI episode frequency improved for all patients, but not significantly compared with placebo (week 4: p = 0.2619, week 8: p = 0.5278). All patients' QoL improved, but not significantly for all parameters (p > 0.05) except depression/self-perception at week 4 (p = 0.0102) and week 8 (p = 0.0069), compared with placebo. Most adverse events were mild and judged probably or possibly related to NRL001.

CONCLUSIONS

All groups demonstrated improvement in efficacy and QoL compared with baseline. NRL001 was well-tolerated without serious safety concerns. Despite the improvement in all groups, there was no statistically significant treatment effect, underlining the importance of relating results to a placebo arm.

Faecal incontinence: Current knowledges and perspectives

Faecal incontinence (FI) is a disabling and frequent symptom since its prevalence can vary between 5% and 15% of the general population. It has a particular negative impact on quality of life. Many tools are currently available for the treatment of FI, from conservative measures to invasive surgical treatments. The conservative treatment may be dietetic measures, various pharmacological agents, anorectal rehabilitation, posterior tibial nerve stimulation, and transanal irrigation. If needed, patients may have miniinvasive approaches such as sacral nerve modulation or antegrade irrigation. In some cases, a surgical treatment is proposed, mainly external anal sphincter repair. Although these different therapeutic options are available, new techniques are arriving allowing new hopes for the patients. Moreover, most of them are non-invasive such as local application of an α1-adrenoceptor agonist, stem cell injections, rectal injection of botulinum toxin, acupuncture. New more invasive techniques with promising results are also coming such as anal magnetic sphincter and antropylorus transposition. This review reports the main current available treatments of FI and the developing therapeutics tools.