BACKGROUND: Delayed-release oral mesalamine 2.4 g/day to 4.8 g/day has been shown to be effective in treating mildly to moderately active ulcerative colitis (UC), but it is unknown whether an initial dose of 4.8 g/day is more effective than 2.4 g/day in patients with mildly to moderately active UC and in the subgroup with moderate disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A six-week, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial assessing the safety and clinical efficacy of a new dose (ASCEND I) of medicationrandomly assigned 301 adults with mildly to moderately active UC to delayed-release oralmesalamine 2.4 g/day (400 mg tablet [n=154]) or 4.8 g/day (800 mg tablet [n=147]). The primary efficacy end point was overall improvement (ie, treatment success), defined as complete remission or response to therapy from baseline to week 6. Primary safety end points were adverse events and laboratory evaluations. Data were also analyzed separately for the prespecified subgroup of patients with moderate UC at baseline. RESULTS:Treatment success was not statistically different between the treatment groups at week 6; 51% of the group (77 of 150) who received delayed-release oral mesalamine 2.4 g/day and 56% of the group (76 of 136) who received 4.8 g/day reached the efficacy end point (P=0.441). Among the moderate disease subgroup, however, the higher initial dose was more effective; 57% of patients (53 of 93) given delayed-release oral mesalamine 2.4 g/day and 72% of patients (55 of 76) given 4.8 g/day achieved treatment success (P=0.0384). Both regimens were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Delayed-release oral mesalamine is an effective and well-tolerated initial therapy in patients with mildly to moderately active UC, and a 4.8 g/day dose may enhance treatment success rates in patients with moderate disease compared with mesalamine 2.4 g/day.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Delayed-release oral mesalamine 2.4 g/day to 4.8 g/day has been shown to be effective in treating mildly to moderately active ulcerative colitis (UC), but it is unknown whether an initial dose of 4.8 g/day is more effective than 2.4 g/day in patients with mildly to moderately active UC and in the subgroup with moderate disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A six-week, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial assessing the safety and clinical efficacy of a new dose (ASCEND I) of medication randomly assigned 301 adults with mildly to moderately active UC to delayed-release oral mesalamine 2.4 g/day (400 mg tablet [n=154]) or 4.8 g/day (800 mg tablet [n=147]). The primary efficacy end point was overall improvement (ie, treatment success), defined as complete remission or response to therapy from baseline to week 6. Primary safety end points were adverse events and laboratory evaluations. Data were also analyzed separately for the prespecified subgroup of patients with moderate UC at baseline. RESULTS: Treatment success was not statistically different between the treatment groups at week 6; 51% of the group (77 of 150) who received delayed-release oral mesalamine 2.4 g/day and 56% of the group (76 of 136) who received 4.8 g/day reached the efficacy end point (P=0.441). Among the moderate disease subgroup, however, the higher initial dose was more effective; 57% of patients (53 of 93) given delayed-release oral mesalamine 2.4 g/day and 72% of patients (55 of 76) given 4.8 g/day achieved treatment success (P=0.0384). Both regimens were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Delayed-release oral mesalamine is an effective and well-tolerated initial therapy in patients with mildly to moderately active UC, and a 4.8 g/day dose may enhance treatment success rates in patients with moderate disease compared with mesalamine 2.4 g/day.
Authors: Charles N Bernstein; Andre Wajda; Lawrence W Svenson; Adrian MacKenzie; Mieke Koehoorn; Maureen Jackson; Richard Fedorak; David Israel; James F Blanchard Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: C A Sninsky; D H Cort; F Shanahan; B J Powers; J T Sessions; R E Pruitt; W H Jacobs; S K Lo; S R Targan; J J Cerda Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 1991-09-01 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Cynthia W Ko; Siddharth Singh; Joseph D Feuerstein; Corinna Falck-Ytter; Yngve Falck-Ytter; Raymond K Cross Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2018-12-18 Impact factor: 22.682