Search

Context: 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.Objective: To determine whether the oral administration of omega-3 free fatty acids is more effective than placebo for prevention of relapse of Crohn disease.Design, Setting, and Patients: 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.Interventions: 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.Main Outcome Measure: 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.Results: 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.Conclusion: In these trials, treatment with omega-3 free fatty acids was not effective for the prevention of relapse in Crohn disease.Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifiers: EPIC-1: NCT00613197, EPIC-2: NCT00074542. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: Objective monitoring and effective early treatment using a treat-to-target approach are key to improving therapeutic outcomes in IBD patients. This study aimed to assess adherence to objective monitoring (clinical, biomarkers, and endoscopy) and its impact on clinical outcomes., Methods: A prospective, multicenter study included consecutive IBD patients starting on adalimumab therapy between January 2019 and December 2020. Disease activity, assessed by the Harvey-Bradshaw index (HBI), partial Mayo, C-reactive protein (CRP), fecal calprotectin (FCAL), and endoscopy were evaluated at adalimumab initiation and 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. Therapeutic drug monitoring, changes in treatment, drug sustainability, and clinical outcomes were assessed., Results: 104 IBD patients were enrolled (78.8% CD, median age 34.3 years, disease duration 9 years). During the 12 months follow-up, high adherence to clinical activity assessment was observed in both CD (81.3%- 87.7%) and UC patients (76.5-90.9%). CRP measurement decreased over time in both CD (37.3%-54.9%) and UC (29.4%-50.0%). The adherence to serial FCAL monitoring was low in CD (22.7-31.3%) and UC patients (17.6-56.0%). UC patients had higher adherence to early endoscopic assessment (<6 months) compared to CD patients (40.9% vs. 21.5%). Adherence to early combined clinical and biomarkers resulted in earlier dose optimization in CD and UC (log-rank<0.001), but drug sustainability was not different. The patients with early combined adherence had a significantly higher clinical remission rate at 1 year compared to non-adherence (70.2% vs. 29.8%, p=0.007) but no significant difference in UC patients., Conclusions: The adherence to early objective monitoring with combined clinical and biomarkers assessment in IBD patients starting adalimumab therapy led to dose optimization and improved 1-year clinical remission in CD but did not change drug sustainability and clinical remission in UC.

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a prevalent gastrointestinal disorder, which impacts the quality of life, work productivity and social activities of patients. Diarrhea-predominant IBS (IBS-D) is one of several subtypes, and accounts for approximately one third of all cases. Currently available treatments are typically unable to alleviate the cardinal symptoms of IBS-D, including abdominal pain and diarrhea, and a clinical unmet need remains for an effective treatment which simultaneously relieves multiple symptoms. Patients may benefit from a multipronged, individualized approach, including dietary modifications, and psychological and pharmacological therapies. The aim of this review is to provide an update on the available and upcoming treatment options for IBS-D in Canada, with reference to the recently updated Canadian IBS consensus guidelines. Initial treatment approaches include lifestyle modifications, dietary modifications, and non-prescription therapies such as peppermint oil. While some medications such as tricyclic antidepressants are also used to treat IBS-D symptoms, eluxadoline and rifaximin are the only two pharmacological therapies approved for the treatment of IBS-D in Canada. Key clinical trial data for the currently available pharmacological options are presented to provide an overview of the efficacy and safety of these agents., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology.)

Background and Aims: This study assessed the efficacy of maintenance treatment with multimatrix mesalazine following achievement of complete or partial remission after induction treatment with high-dose multimatrix mesalazine., Methods: In this phase 3b/4, open-label, multicentre, prospective, single-arm study, patients with mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis were treated with multimatrix mesalazine 4.8g/day once daily for 8 weeks [induction phase]. At Week 8, those who achieved complete or partial remission, based on predefined clinical and endoscopic criteria, were eligible to receive 12 months of multimatrix mesalazine 2.4g/day once daily maintenance therapy. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients in complete remission at Month 12., Results: A total of 717 patients received induction treatment; 25.9% and 39.3% of patients achieved complete and partial remission, respectively, at Week 8. A total of 461 patients entered the maintenance phase. The likelihood of remaining in/achieving complete remission at Month 12 was higher for patients who entered the maintenance phase in complete remission compared with those who began maintenance in partial remission [47.8% vs 26.0%; p < 0.001]. At Month 12, mucosal healing [endoscopy score ≤ 1] was demonstrated in 76.4% [139/182] and 63.5% [176/277] of those who were in complete and partial remission, respectively, at the end of induction., Conclusion: Patients achieving complete remission before dose reduction were more likely to remain in remission at Month 12., (© European Crohn’s and Colitis Organisation 2016.)

Objective: This study was designed to assess the diagnostic and symptom profile of patients receiving tegaserod in routine clinical practice, and to identify their demographic characteristics, as well as the association between these characteristics and diagnosis., Methods: This prospective, observational study collected data from physicians on the symptoms and/or diagnosis, age range and gender for patients to whom they prescribed tegaserod. Details of the physician characteristics included whether they were a family physician or a specialist, and the region of Canada in which their practice was located., Results: A total of 500 patients were enrolled at 85 sites in Canada. The majority (85%) of the patients were enrolled by family physicians, and the remainder by community-based specialists. The patients were predominantly female (87%) and the highest percentages were in the 35-44 (23%) and 45-54 (25%) age groups. Nearly all patients (96%) were prescribed tegaserod on the basis of both symptoms and diagnosis. The most frequently reported symptoms were abdominal pain and/or discomfort (87%), bloating (80%) and constipation (75%). Most patients (57%) presented with all three of these symptoms. Constipation-predominant Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS-C) was the most common diagnosis (55%), followed by IBS alternating between constipation and diarrhea (IBS-A) (23%). Based on this, 67% of patients were given tegaserod strictly according to the label, although it was appropriately prescribed to 87%., Conclusions: In Canada, tegaserod is prescribed to patients with symptoms of abdominal pain and/or discomfort, bloating and constipation. Most of them will also have a diagnosis of either IBS-C or IBS. It is generally being prescribed appropriately.

The present paper is an update to and extension of the previous systematic review on the primary care management of patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia (UD). The original publication of the clinical management tool focused on the initial four- to eight-week assessment of UD. This update is based on new data from systematic reviews and clinical trials relevant to UD. There is now direct clinical evidence supporting a test-and-treat approach in patients with nondominant heartburn dyspepsia symptoms, and head-to-head comparisons show that use of a proton pump inhibitor is superior to the use of H2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs) in the initial treatment of Helicobacter pylori-negative dyspepsia patients. Cisapride is no longer available as a treatment option and evidence for other prokinetic agents is lacking. In patients with long-standing heartburn-dominant (ie, gastroesophageal reflux disease) and nonheartburn-dominant dyspepsia, a once-in-a-lifetime endoscopy is recommended. Endoscopy should also be considered in patients with new-onset dyspepsia that develops after the age of 50 years. Conventional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, acetylsalicylic acid and cyclooxygenase-2-selective inhibitors can all cause dyspepsia. If their use cannot be discontinued, cotherapy with either a proton pump inhibitor, misoprostol or high-dose H2RAs is recommended, although the evidence is based on ulcer data and not dyspepsia data. In patients with nonheartburn-dominant dyspepsia, noninvasive testing for H pylori should be performed and treatment given if positive. When starting nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for a prolonged course, testing and treatment with H2RAs are advised if patients have a history of previous ulcers or ulcer bleeding.

Objectives: To provide Canadian primary care physicians with an evidence-based clinical management tool, including diagnostic and treatment recommendations, for patients who present with uninvestigated dyspepsia., Recommendations: The management tool has 5 key decision steps addressing the following: (1) evidence that symptoms originate in the upper gastrointestinal tract, (2) presence of alarm features, (3) use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), (4) dominant reflux symptoms and (5) evidence of Helicobacter pylori infection. All patients over 50 years of age who present with new-onset dyspepsia and patients who present with alarm features should receive prompt investigation, preferably by endoscopy. The management options for patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia who use NSAIDs regularly are: (1) to stop NSAID therapy and assess symptomatic response, (2) to treat with NSAID prophylaxis if NSAID therapy cannot be stopped or (3) to refer for investigation. Gastroesophageal reflux disease can be diagnosed clinically if the patient's dominant symptoms are heartburn or acid regurgitation, or both; these patients should be treated with acid suppressive therapy. The remaining patients should be tested for H. pylori infection, and those with a positive result should be treated with H. pylori-eradication therapy. Those with a negative result should have their symptoms treated with optimal antisecretory therapy or a prokinetic agent. VALIDATION AND EVIDENCE: Evidence for resolution of the dyspepsia symptoms was the main outcome measure. Supporting evidence for the 5 steps in the management tool and the recommendations for treatment were graded according to the strength of the evidence and were endorsed by consensus of committee members. If no randomized controlled clinical trials were available, the recommendations were based on the best available evidence., Literature Review: Evidence was obtained from MEDLINE searches for pertinent articles published from 1966 to October 1999. The searches focused on dyspepsia, diagnosis and treatment. Additional articles were retrieved through a manual search of bibliographies and abstracts from international gastroenterology conferences.

Aim: To investigate the efficacy of two omeprazole triple therapies for the eradication of Helicobacter pylori, ulcer healing and ulcer relapse during a 6-month treatment-free period in patients with active duodenal ulcer., Methods: This was a double-blind, randomized study in 15 centres across Canada. Patients (n = 149) were randomized to omeprazole 20 mg once daily (O) or one of two 1-week b. d. eradication regimens: omeprazole 20 mg, metronidazole 400 mg and clarithromycin 250 mg (OMC) or omeprazole 20 mg, amoxycillin 1000 mg and clarithromycin 500 mg (OAC). All patients were treated for three additional weeks with omeprazole 20 mg once daily. Ulcer healing was assessed by endoscopy after 4 weeks of study therapy. H. pylori eradication was determined by a 13C-urea breath test and histology, performed at pre-entry, at 4 weeks after the end of all therapy and at 6 months., Results: The intention-to-treat (intention-to-treat) analysis contained 146 patients and the per protocol (per protocol) analysis, 114 patients. The eradication rates were (intention-to-treat/per protocol): OMC-85% and 92%, OAC-78% and 87% and O-0% (O). Ulcer healing (intention-to-treat) was greater than 90% in all groups. The differences in the eradication and relapse rates between O vs. OMC and O vs. OAC were statistically significant (all, P < 0.001). Treatment was well tolerated and compliance was high., Conclusion: The OMC and OAC 1-week treatment regimens are safe and effective for eradication, healing and the prevention of relapse in duodenal ulcer patients.

Background: Eradication of Helicobacter pylori provides potential cure in the majority of patients with peptic ulcer disease, and eradication rates of more than 90% have been reported, using omeprazole in combination with two antimicrobials. The choice of antimicrobials, dose regimen and duration of treatment have varied between studies, however, and an optimal treatment still has to be established., Materials and Methods: We conducted an international, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study involving more than 100 patients in each of six treatment groups in 43 hospital gastrointestinal units in Canada, Germany, Ireland, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. Patients (n = 787) with proved duodenal ulcer disease were randomized to treatment twice daily for 1 week with omeprazole, 20 mg (O), plus either placebo (P) or combinations of two of the following antimicrobials: amoxicillin, 1 gm (A), clarithromycin, 250 or 500 mg (C250, C500), or metronidazole, 400 mg (M). Eradication of H. pylori was evaluated by 13C-UBT, performed before and 4 weeks after treatment cessation., Results: The eradication rates for the all-patients-treated analysis were 96%, OAC500; 95%, OMC250; 90%, OMC500; 84%, OAC250; 79%, OAM; and 1%, OP. OAC500 and OMC250 achieved eradication rates with lower 95% confidence interval limits exceeding 90%. All regimens were well-tolerated, 96% of patients complied with their dose regimen, and 2.3% of the patients discontinued treatment owing to adverse events., Conclusions: Omeprazole triple therapies given twice daily for 1 week produce high eradication rates, are well-tolerated, and are associated with high patient compliance. The two most effective therapies were those combining omeprazole, 20 mg, with either amoxicillin, 1 gm, plus clarithromycin, 500 mg, or metronidazole, 400 mg, plus clarithromycin, 250 mg, all given twice daily.

Effects of octreotide (1.25 micrograms/kg subcutaneously) on colonic tone and visceral perception were evaluated in 10 IBS patients, using a barostat and compared to placebo in a double-blind crossover study. Colonic sensory thresholds were also studied in healthy controls for comparison with IBS patients. Colonic tone was reflected by variations in volume of the barostat balloon. Baseline volume was 117 +/- 38 ml and was not modified by placebo (122 +/- 40 ml) or octreotide (106 +/- 42 ml). After the meal, maximal decrease in balloon volume was 75 +/- 4% following placebo (P < 0.001) beginning after 9 +/- 3 min and lasting 136 +/- 17 min. Following octreotide, the maximal decrease was 69 +/- 16% (NS vs placebo), after 10 +/- 3 min and lasting 140 +/- 22 min. In the second part, discomfort and pain thresholds were evaluated during isobaric distensions (4 mm Hg increments, 5-min duration, 5-min interval with return to pressure 0 between each). The pressure inducing discomfort was 21.2 +/- 5.9 mm Hg following placebo vs 29.6 +/- 6.6 mm Hg following octreotide (P < 0.01). The pressure inducing pain was 24.8 +/- 7.3 mm Hg following placebo vs 33.2 +/- 7.3 mm Hg following octreotide (P < 0.01). In healthy subjects, discomfort and pain were induced by colonic distensions at a mean intraballoon pressure of 32.7 +/- 5.8 mm Hg and 36.7 +/- 3.9 mm Hg, respectively. Compliance curves were not different following placebo and octreotide. Octreotide significantly increases thresholds for visceral perception in IBS patients without modifying compliance during distension nor colonic tone.

The symptoms of functional dyspepsia are still unexplained. To evaluate the possible role of abnormal visceral perception, we studied the symptomatic responses and the pressure variations during progressive gastric distension in 10 female healthy control subjects (mean age 33.6 years) and in 10 female patients with functional dyspepsia (mean age 35.2 years). A rubber balloon was positioned 4 cm below the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) and inflated with progressively larger volumes of air by steps of 50 ml; pressures at the gastric fundus and at the LES were continuously recorded by perfused manometric catheters. Each subject was studied on two separate occasions after randomized double-blind administration of either placebo or 20 mg of domperidone. Symptomatic responses and the manometric data were analyzed at the time of the initial recognition of distension (bloating step) and at the time of reporting pain or up to a maximum of 700 ml of balloon inflation (pain or 700-ml step). On placebo, the volumes of gastric distension were more than two times lower in patients than in control subjects at the bloating step (185 +/- 32 ml vs 470 +/- 40 ml, P = 0.001) and at the pain or 700-ml step (265 +/- 54 ml vs 600 +/- 34 ml, P less than 0.005), while the pressure gradients (pressure at inflation steps minus baseline pressure before beginning inflation) were not statistically different between the two groups.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)