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

Oral Drug Delivery Systems Applied to Launched Products: Value for the Patients and Industrial Considerations

Drug delivery systems (DDS) control the amount, rate, and site of administration of drug substances in the body as well as their release and ADME (absorption, distribution, metabolism, excretion). Among the various types of DDS, amount-controlled DDS for solubilization and absorption increase the bioavailability. Time- and amount-controlled DDS are controlled release formulations classified as (1) membrane-type, (2) matrix-type, (3) osmotic-type, and (4) ion-exchange type. Timed-release formulations also control the time and amount of release and the absorption of drugs. Site- and amount-controlled DDS are characterized by colonic delivery and intestinal lymph-targeting to improve release and ADME of drug substances. Finally, site-, time-, and amount-controlled DDS are gastroretentive formulations and local delivery in the oral cavity to improve site retention, release, and ADME of drugs. DDS can enhance efficacy, reduce adverse effects, and optimize the dosing frequency of various drug products to increase patient value. This review focuses on patient value and industrial considerations of launched oral DDS. We provide a technological overview of candidate and marketed DDS, as well as the pros/cons of the technologies for industrialization with consideration to excipients, manufacturing, and storage stability. Moreover, to demonstrate the usefulness of the technology and support the selection and development of the best technologies for patients, we also describe patient value from clinical studies and analyses, particularly with regard to increased new medical options, higher efficacy, reduced adverse effects, reduced number of doses and clinic visits, easier administration, higher quality of life, greater adherence, and satisfaction.

Significance of 5-Aminosalicylic Acid Intolerance in the Clinical Management of Ulcerative Colitis

BACKGROUND

Two major types of 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA)-containing preparations, namely, mesalazine/5-ASA and sulfasalazine (SASP), are currently used as first-line therapy for ulcerative colitis. Recent reports show that optimization of 5-ASA therapy is beneficial for both patient outcomes and healthcare costs. Although 5-ASA and SASP have good efficacy and safety profiles, clinicians occasionally encounter patients who develop 5-ASA intolerance.

SUMMARY

The most common symptoms of acute 5-ASA intolerance syndrome are exacerbation of diarrhea, fever, and abdominal pain. Patients who discontinue 5-ASA therapy because of intolerance have a higher risk of adverse clinical outcomes, such as hospital admission, colectomy, need for advanced therapies, and loss of response to anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) biologics. When patients develop symptoms of 5-ASA intolerance, the clinician should consider changing the type of 5-ASA preparation. Recent genome-wide association studies and meta-analyses have shown that 5-ASA allergy is associated with certain single-nucleotide polymorphisms. Although there are no modalities or biomarkers for diagnosing 5-ASA intolerance, the drug-induced lymphocyte stimulation test can be used to assist in the diagnosis of acute 5-ASA intolerance syndrome with high specificity and low sensitivity. This review presents a general overview of 5-ASA and SASP in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease and discusses the latest insights into 5-ASA intolerance.

KEY MESSAGES

5-ASA is used as first-line therapy for ulcerative colitis. Optimization of 5-ASA may be beneficial for patient outcomes and healthcare systems. Acute 5-ASA intolerance syndrome is characterized by diarrhea, fever, and abdominal pain. Periodic renal function monitoring is recommended for patients receiving 5-ASA.

Pharmacological Management of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: a Century of Expert Opinions in Cecil Textbook of Medicine

BACKGROUND

Advances in drug therapy for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) [Crohn disease and ulcerative colitis (UC)] have contributed to a decrease in the severity of these chronic and disabling conditions.

STUDY QUESTION

What are the milestones of the changes in the expert approach to the pharmacological management of IBD in the past century?

STUDY DESIGN

To determine the changes in the experts' approach to the management of regional ileitis and UC, as presented in a widely used textbook in the United States.

DATA SOURCES

The chapters presenting the management of IBD in the 26 editions of Cecil Textbook of Medicine published from 1927 through 2020.

RESULTS

No specific interventions existed from 1927 through 1942. The pharmacological management of IBD has had 3 slightly overlapping eras starting in 1943. During the first period (1943-1951), the medical management relied on antibiotics, primarily sulfonamides and chloramphenicol. In the second (1955-75), experts recommended the use of adrenocorticotropic hormone or corticosteroids and 5-aminosalicylate. In the third era, which commenced in 1979 and is continuing to date, the pharmacological interventions have been expanded and refined to include 5 main drug classes, 5-aminosalicylates (sulfasalazine, mesalamine, and olsalazine), corticosteroids (prednisone and budesonide), immunomodulators (azathioprine, 6-mercaptopurine, cyclosporine, and tofacitinib), biologics (infliximab adalimumab certolizumab pegol, and natalizumab), and antibiotics (metronidazole and ciprofloxacin). A consensus exists that the monoclonal antibodies again tumor necrosis factor alpha are cost-effective for induction and maintenance of clinical remission in both UC (golimumab) and Crohn disease (certolizumab pegol). The newer agents ustekinumab (a monoclonal antibody to the interleukin p40 subunit) and vedolizumab (a monoclonal antibody to the homing receptor integrin complex) have also performed well.

CONCLUSIONS

The pharmacological management of IBD has been the focus of intense research and development in the past 60 years. The pillars of drug treatment have been 5-aminosalicylates and corticosteroids. Recent pharmacological innovations (immunomodulators and biologicals) constitute an encouraging paradigm shift in the treatment of UC and Crohn disease.