Dina Kao1, Brandi Roach1, Marisela Silva2, Paul Beck3, Kevin Rioux4, Gilaad G Kaplan3, Hsiu-Ju Chang5, Stephanie Coward6, Karen J Goodman1, Huiping Xu7, Karen Madsen1, Andrew Mason1, Gane Ka-Shu Wong8,9,10, Juan Jovel8, Jordan Patterson8, Thomas Louie2. 1. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. 2. Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. 3. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. 4. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada. 5. University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. 6. Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. 7. Department of Biostatistics, Indiana University, Indianapolis. 8. Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. 9. Department of Biological Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. 10. BGI-Shenzhen, Shenzhen, China.
Abstract
Importance: Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is effective in preventing recurrent Clostridium difficile infection (RCDI). However, it is not known whether clinical efficacy differs by route of delivery. Objective: To determine whether FMT by oral capsule is noninferior to colonoscopy delivery in efficacy. Design, Setting, and Participants: Noninferiority, unblinded, randomized trial conducted in 3 academic centers in Alberta, Canada. A total of 116 adult patients with RCDI were enrolled between October 2014 and September 2016, with follow-up to December 2016. The noninferiority margin was 15%. Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned to FMT by capsule or by colonoscopy at a 1:1 ratio. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the proportion of patients without RCDI 12 weeks after FMT. Secondary outcomes included (1) serious and minor adverse events, (2) changes in quality of life by the 36-Item Short Form Survey on a scale of 0 (worst possible quality of life) to 100 (best quality of life), and (3) patient perception on a scale of 1 (not at all unpleasant) to 10 (extremely unpleasant) and satisfaction on a scale of 1 (best) to 10 (worst). Results: Among 116 patients randomized (mean [SD] age, 58 [19] years; 79 women [68%]), 105 (91%) completed the trial, with 57 patients randomized to the capsule group and 59 to the colonoscopy group. In per-protocol analysis, prevention of RCDI after a single treatment was achieved in 96.2% in both the capsule group (51/53) and the colonoscopy group (50/52) (difference, 0%; 1-sided 95% CI, -6.1% to infinity; P < .001), meeting the criterion for noninferiority. One patient in each group died of underlying cardiopulmonary illness unrelated to FMT. Rates of minor adverse events were 5.4% for the capsule group vs 12.5% for the colonoscopy group. There was no significant between-group difference in improvement in quality of life. A significantly greater proportion of participants receiving capsules rated their experience as "not at all unpleasant" (66% vs 44%; difference, 22% [95% CI, 3%-40%]; P = .01). Conclusions and Relevance: Among adults with RCDI, FMT via oral capsules was not inferior to delivery by colonoscopy for preventing recurrent infection over 12 weeks. Treatment with oral capsules may be an effective approach to treating RCDI. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02254811.
RCT Entities:
Importance: Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is effective in preventing recurrent Clostridium difficileinfection (RCDI). However, it is not known whether clinical efficacy differs by route of delivery. Objective: To determine whether FMT by oral capsule is noninferior to colonoscopy delivery in efficacy. Design, Setting, and Participants: Noninferiority, unblinded, randomized trial conducted in 3 academic centers in Alberta, Canada. A total of 116 adult patients with RCDI were enrolled between October 2014 and September 2016, with follow-up to December 2016. The noninferiority margin was 15%. Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned to FMT by capsule or by colonoscopy at a 1:1 ratio. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the proportion of patients without RCDI 12 weeks after FMT. Secondary outcomes included (1) serious and minor adverse events, (2) changes in quality of life by the 36-Item Short Form Survey on a scale of 0 (worst possible quality of life) to 100 (best quality of life), and (3) patient perception on a scale of 1 (not at all unpleasant) to 10 (extremely unpleasant) and satisfaction on a scale of 1 (best) to 10 (worst). Results: Among 116 patients randomized (mean [SD] age, 58 [19] years; 79 women [68%]), 105 (91%) completed the trial, with 57 patients randomized to the capsule group and 59 to the colonoscopy group. In per-protocol analysis, prevention of RCDI after a single treatment was achieved in 96.2% in both the capsule group (51/53) and the colonoscopy group (50/52) (difference, 0%; 1-sided 95% CI, -6.1% to infinity; P < .001), meeting the criterion for noninferiority. One patient in each group died of underlying cardiopulmonary illness unrelated to FMT. Rates of minor adverse events were 5.4% for the capsule group vs 12.5% for the colonoscopy group. There was no significant between-group difference in improvement in quality of life. A significantly greater proportion of participants receiving capsules rated their experience as "not at all unpleasant" (66% vs 44%; difference, 22% [95% CI, 3%-40%]; P = .01). Conclusions and Relevance: Among adults with RCDI, FMT via oral capsules was not inferior to delivery by colonoscopy for preventing recurrent infection over 12 weeks. Treatment with oral capsules may be an effective approach to treating RCDI. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02254811.
Authors: Eyal Zimlichman; Daniel Henderson; Orly Tamir; Calvin Franz; Peter Song; Cyrus K Yamin; Carol Keohane; Charles R Denham; David W Bates Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2013 Dec 9-23 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Christina M Surawicz; Lawrence J Brandt; David G Binion; Ashwin N Ananthakrishnan; Scott R Curry; Peter H Gilligan; Lynne V McFarland; Mark Mellow; Brian S Zuckerbraun Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2013-02-26 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Ilan Youngster; George H Russell; Christina Pindar; Tomer Ziv-Baran; Jenny Sauk; Elizabeth L Hohmann Journal: JAMA Date: 2014-11-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Els van Nood; Anne Vrieze; Max Nieuwdorp; Susana Fuentes; Erwin G Zoetendal; Willem M de Vos; Caroline E Visser; Ed J Kuijper; Joep F W M Bartelsman; Jan G P Tijssen; Peter Speelman; Marcel G W Dijkgraaf; Josbert J Keller Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-01-16 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Turki Abujamel; Jennifer L Cadnum; Lucy A Jury; Venkata C K Sunkesula; Sirisha Kundrapu; Robin L Jump; Alain C Stintzi; Curtis J Donskey Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-10-02 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Jessica R Allegretti; Monika Fischer; Sashidhar V Sagi; Matthew E Bohm; Hala M Fadda; Sejal R Ranmal; Shrish Budree; Abdul W Basit; Dean L Glettig; Eva L de la Serna; Amanda Gentile; Ylaine Gerardin; Sonia Timberlake; Rotem Sadovsky; Mark Smith; Zain Kassam Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2018-12-05 Impact factor: 3.199
Authors: Benjamin H Mullish; Mohammed Nabil Quraishi; Jonathan P Segal; Gianluca Ianiro; Tariq H Iqbal Journal: Frontline Gastroenterol Date: 2020-02-04
Authors: Md Abdul Wadud Khan; Gabriel Ologun; Reetakshi Arora; Jennifer L McQuade; Jennifer A Wargo Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2020-03 Impact factor: 3.199