P Marteau1, C Florent. 1. Gastroenterology Department, Laënnec Hospital AP-HP, Paris, France.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The efficacy and tolerance of slow-release 5-ASA suppositories (Pentasa 1 g/day) were compared with those of conventional 5-ASA suppositories (Rowasa 0.5 g b.i.d.). METHODS:Two hundred and fifty-one (251) patients presenting with an exacerbation of cryptogenic proctitis were randomized. Clinical activity and rectal lesions were measured at days 1 and 14 (and at day 21 for patients not in remission at day 14), and each patient had to fill out a daily diary card (checklist). RESULTS: Results are given for slow-release and classical suppositories, respectively. The reduction in symptoms and lesions was identical in both groups. Treatment was continued until day 21 in 36% versus 33% of the patients, and minor or moderate side effects occurred in 5.6% versus 6.3% (NS). The tolerance of the suppositories was rated as satisfactory every day by 77% versus 54% (p = 0.001), and early suppository expulsion occurred in 0.5% versus 3.4% (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The treatments were equally effective and both were well tolerated. However, the advantages of the slow-release suppositories were that patients exhibited greater tolerance and early expulsion was less frequent.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: The efficacy and tolerance of slow-release 5-ASA suppositories (Pentasa 1 g/day) were compared with those of conventional 5-ASA suppositories (Rowasa 0.5 g b.i.d.). METHODS: Two hundred and fifty-one (251) patients presenting with an exacerbation of cryptogenic proctitis were randomized. Clinical activity and rectal lesions were measured at days 1 and 14 (and at day 21 for patients not in remission at day 14), and each patient had to fill out a daily diary card (checklist). RESULTS: Results are given for slow-release and classical suppositories, respectively. The reduction in symptoms and lesions was identical in both groups. Treatment was continued until day 21 in 36% versus 33% of the patients, and minor or moderate side effects occurred in 5.6% versus 6.3% (NS). The tolerance of the suppositories was rated as satisfactory every day by 77% versus 54% (p = 0.001), and early suppository expulsion occurred in 0.5% versus 3.4% (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The treatments were equally effective and both were well tolerated. However, the advantages of the slow-release suppositories were that patients exhibited greater tolerance and early expulsion was less frequent.