Switching between Three Types of Mesalazine Formulation and Sulfasalazine in Patients with Active Ulcerative Colitis Who Have Already Received High-Dose Treatment with These Agents

The insoluble excretion of multi-matrix system mesalazine preparations in patients with ulcerative colitis

BACKGROUND

Multi-matrix mesalazine (MMX) is an important treatment for ulcerative colitis (UC); however, it is often excreted intact, which increases the risk of relapse. This study aimed to clarify the risk factors for insoluble MMX excretion.

METHODS

The subjects were 102 UC patients who were newly prescribed MMX alone to induce remission. Their stools were evaluated on the Bristol Stool Form Scale (BSFS), the presence/absence of insoluble MMX excretion was investigated in interviews, and defecation frequency at the start of treatment and disease type were retrospectively investigated by examining their medical records.

RESULTS

The insoluble excretion rate (IER) was 14.7%. It tended to be higher in the patients with left-sided colitis or extensive colitis, although the differences among the disease types were not significant (p = 0.053). The mean defecation frequency of the patients that reported insoluble MMX excretion was significantly higher than that of the patients that did not report it (6.27 ± 5.28 vs. 3.69 ± 3.17, p < 0.05). The IER tended to be higher among the patients with soft stools (4.5%, 21.9%, and 23.1% in those with BSFS scores of ≤ 4, 5, and ≥ 6, respectively). In ROC analysis of defecation frequency, ≥ 3.5 defecations was found to exhibit sensitivity and specificity of 66.7% and 65.5%, respectively, for predicting insoluble MMX excretion.

CONCLUSIONS

The likelihood of insoluble MMX excretion is influenced by defecation frequency and the extent of inflammation. It is important to keep the possibility of insoluble excretion in mind when prescribing MMX.

pH-dependent vs. constant release of mesalazine in the treatment of ulcerative colitis: Do drug delivery concepts determine therapeutic efficacy? (Review)

Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) have developed to become a major global health problem. Ulcerative colitis (UC) is one of two main types of IBD, and >90% of patients suffering from mild or moderate forms of UC are treated with mesalazine, a well-tolerated and cost-effective drug. To allow oral administration, the drug has to be protected from resorption before it can reach the affected sites in the colon. The drug is therefore released from most currently used medications either constantly slow (time-dependent) or triggered by an increased pH during gastrointestinal transition. Both variants are widely used in clinical practice and it is surprising that they have not yet been compared directly in a large clinical study. In this overview, the evidence that may suggest preferential use of one type of mesalazine formulation over the other in general or for defined subgroups of patients is summarized and evaluated. Data from in vitro modelling of drug release and measurements of drug concentrations in colonic mucosa suggest that in many cases, constant release and pH-dependent formulations are of similar therapeutic efficiency; however, pH-triggered release may be superior in patients with proctitis-type UC or sites of inflammation in the proximal colon. Additionally, patients with a long gastric residence time, slow small intestinal transition, disease-related diarrhea or sensitivity to systemic adverse effects may benefit more from pH-dependent release formulations. In general, medications based on both concepts show similar efficacies, but the pH-dependent release formulations seem to be more robust in the treatment of a not further classified group of patients with UC. Future comparative clinical studies are required to clearly define the subgroups of patients that should be treated preferably with constant or pH-dependent release formulations of mesalazine.

Multicenter survey on mesalamine intolerance in patients with ulcerative colitis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Although oral mesalamine is the first-choice drug for treating mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis (UC), some patients show symptoms of intolerance, including exacerbation of diarrhea and abdominal pain. The present study clarified the current state and clinical courses of patients with mesalamine intolerance.

METHODS

Patients who were diagnosed with UC and administered oral mesalamine at eight hospitals in Japan with a follow-up period exceeding 1 year were analyzed.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven (11%) of 633 patients showed intolerance to at least one formulation of oral mesalamine. The frequency of mesalamine intolerance has increased in recent years, rising from 5.3% in 2007-2010 to 9.1% in 2011-2013 and 16.2% in 2014-2016. The most common complications were the exacerbation of diarrhea (n = 29), a fever (n = 25), and abdominal pain (n = 22). Readministration of mesalamine/sulfasalazine was attempted in 43 patients, mostly with other types of formulation of mesalamine, and more than half of these patients proved to be tolerant. The risk factors for mesalamine intolerance were female gender (odds ratio [OR] = 1.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.08-3.12), age < 60 years old (OR = 2.82; CI, 1.19-8.33), and pancolitis (OR = 2.09; 95% CI, 1.23-3.60). There were no significant differences in the use of anti-tumor necrosis factor-α agents, colectomy, or steroid-free remission at the last visit between patients with and without mesalamine intolerance.

CONCLUSIONS

Mesalamine intolerance is not rare, and its frequency has been increasing recently. The prognosis of patients with mesalamine intolerance did not differ significantly from that of those without intolerance.