AIM: To use an evidence-based approach to evaluate the safety and tolerability of the treatments available for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), or in clinical development, in Europe. A separate review appraises the evidence for the efficacy of these therapies. METHODS: A literature search (for 1980 to 2005) was completed for all relevant clinical trial data and other articles which included safety information on the use of pharmacological IBS therapies. Clinical trials were scored according to the level of safety information, and adverse event incidence reported when possible. RESULTS: The tolerability of many of the agents used to treat IBS in Europe is poorly understood. However, serotonergic agents, such as tegaserod and alosetron, which are currently unavailable in Europe, have undergone rigorous assessment in IBS and their benefits have been established. Following initial marketing of alosetron for use in patients with IBS with diarrhoea, concerns about severe constipation and ischaemic colitis resulted in restriction of its use to women with severe IBS symptoms. This highlights the importance of post-marketing surveillance and post-marketing studies in refining the therapeutic indication of new IBS therapies, which will help to identify appropriate recipients for the drug and establish the impact of adverse reactions in clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant lack of data on the safety and tolerability of the therapies currently used routinely to treat IBS in Europe. The newer agents have undergone rigorous assessment, such that their benefits and risks in treating IBS are established. Defining their place among the spectrum of available therapies remains challenging when the benefits and risks of the older treatments are so poorly characterized.
AIM: To use an evidence-based approach to evaluate the safety and tolerability of the treatments available for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), or in clinical development, in Europe. A separate review appraises the evidence for the efficacy of these therapies. METHODS: A literature search (for 1980 to 2005) was completed for all relevant clinical trial data and other articles which included safety information on the use of pharmacological IBS therapies. Clinical trials were scored according to the level of safety information, and adverse event incidence reported when possible. RESULTS: The tolerability of many of the agents used to treat IBS in Europe is poorly understood. However, serotonergic agents, such as tegaserod and alosetron, which are currently unavailable in Europe, have undergone rigorous assessment in IBS and their benefits have been established. Following initial marketing of alosetron for use in patients with IBS with diarrhoea, concerns about severe constipation and ischaemic colitis resulted in restriction of its use to women with severe IBS symptoms. This highlights the importance of post-marketing surveillance and post-marketing studies in refining the therapeutic indication of new IBS therapies, which will help to identify appropriate recipients for the drug and establish the impact of adverse reactions in clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant lack of data on the safety and tolerability of the therapies currently used routinely to treat IBS in Europe. The newer agents have undergone rigorous assessment, such that their benefits and risks in treating IBS are established. Defining their place among the spectrum of available therapies remains challenging when the benefits and risks of the older treatments are so poorly characterized.