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 & Aims: Methotrexate and infliximab are effective therapies for Crohn's disease (CD). In the combination of maintenance methotrexate-infliximab trial, we evaluated the potential superiority of combination therapy over infliximab alone., Methods: In a 50-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we compared methotrexate and infliximab with infliximab alone in 126 patients with CD who had initiated prednisone induction therapy (15-40 mg/day) within the preceding 6 weeks. Patients were assigned randomly to groups given methotrexate at an initial weekly dose of 10 mg, escalating to 25 mg/week (n = 63), or placebo (n = 63). Both groups received infliximab (5 mg/kg of body weight) at weeks 1, 3, 7, and 14, and every 8 weeks thereafter. Prednisone was tapered, beginning at week 1, and discontinued no later than week 14. The primary outcome was time to treatment failure, defined as a lack of prednisone-free remission (CD Activity Index, <150) at week 14 or failure to maintain remission through week 50., Results: Patients' baseline characteristics were similar between groups. By week 50, the actuarial rate of treatment failure was 30.6% in the combination therapy group compared with 29.8% in the infliximab monotherapy group (P = .63; hazard ratio, 1.16; 95% confidence interval, 0.62-2.17). Prespecified subgroup analyses failed to show a benefit in patients with short disease duration or an increased level of C-reactive protein. No clinically meaningful differences were observed in secondary outcomes. Combination therapy was well tolerated., Conclusions: The combination of infliximab and methotrexate, although safe, was no more effective than infliximab alone in patients with CD receiving treatment with prednisone. ClincialTrials.gov number, NCT00132899., (Copyright © 2014 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Cancer Care Ontario has recommended a program to screen for colorectal cancer using fecal occult blood testing (FOBT). Patients who test positive on FOBT will require further investigation. We examined the cost of finding an advanced adenoma in these patients using four different strategies., Methods: Using decision analysis software (DATA 3.5, TreeAge Software, Boston, MA), we considered four strategies for evaluating patients referred for a positive FOBT: 1) flexible sigmoidoscopy to the splenic flexure, 2) flexible sigmoidoscopy with air contrast barium enema (ACBE), 3) virtual colonoscopy, and 4) colonoscopy. If an adenoma was found in any of the first three methods, colonoscopy and polypectomy were performed. An advanced adenoma was defined as a villous adenoma, tubular adenoma > or = 10 mm, high grade dysplasia, or cancer. Values for probabilities, test characteristics and costs ($CDN) were estimated from a MEDLINE literature review, local costs, and OHIP fee codes. Patients with adenomas identified as well as direct medical costs from a third party payer perspective were calculated., Results: Assuming a probability of adenoma of 16.9%, the cost for each strategy (compared to no investigation) was as follows: flexible sigmoidoscopy to the splenic flexure, $226; flexible sigmoidoscopy with ACBE, $424; virtual colonoscopy, $597; and colonoscopy, $387. The cost to clear a patient of adenoma(s) was $1,930, $2,840, $3,681, and $2,290, respectively. Despite being most cost-effective, the sigmoidoscopy strategy was predicted to detect 69% of cases of advanced adenomas. The radiological strategies would be less expensive if ACBE cost less than $115 or virtual colonoscopy cost less than $291. The colonoscopy strategy was more cost-effective if the probability of an adenoma was > or = 33.5%. When the incremental costs were considered to investigate 1000 patients, virtual colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy with ACBE were both more costly then colonoscopy, and neither detected as many cases of advanced adenomas., Conclusion: Improved access to colonoscopy seems to be the preferred approach to deal with increased referrals.

Background: Patients often recover from an episode of acute pancreatitis with conservative therapy and without an identified cause. The options include proceeding with ERCP to identify and treat an occult common bile duct stone or performing the procedure only after a second episode of idiopathic pancreatitis occurs., Methods: Decision analysis (SMLTREE software) was used to determine incremental cost-utility. Variables were estimated from a search of the literature, a utility analysis involving health professionals familiar with the question, and a retrospective review of hospital charts and costs., Results: This model estimates an incremental utility gain for the prompt ERCP approach of 1.0 quality-adjusted life weeks per patient at an incremental cost of $245 (Canadian). This yields a cost-utility ratio of $12,740 (Canadian) per quality-adjusted life year. The result was highly sensitive to the probability of finding an occult common bile duct stone., Conclusion: Routine ERCP is of marginal overall benefit, but is of more substantial benefit and is more cost-effective in a subgroup of patients with a greater probability of having an occult common duct stone.