Budesonide Multimatrix Is Efficacious for Mesalamine-refractory, Mild to Moderate Ulcerative Colitis: A Randomised, Placebo-controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Safety and efficacy of budesonide multimatrix, an oral extended-release second-generation corticosteroid designed for targeted delivery throughout the colon, were examined for induction of remission in patients with mild to moderate ulcerative colitis refractory to baseline mesalamine therapy. METHODS: A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial evaluated efficacy and safety of budesonide multimatrix for induction of remission [ulcerative colitis disease activity index score ≥ 4 and ≤ 10] in 510 adults randomised to once-daily oral budesonide multimatrix 9 mg or placebo for 8 weeks. Patients continued baseline treatment with oral mesalamine ≥ 2.4 g/day. RESULTS: Combined clinical and endoscopic remission at Week 8 was achieved by 13.0% and 7.5% of patients receiving budesonide multimatrix [n = 230] or placebo [n = 228], respectively, in the modified intention-to-treat population [p = 0.049]. Clinical remission [ulcerative colitis disease activity index rectal bleeding and stool frequency subscale scores of 0] was similar in both groups [p = 0.70]. More patients receiving budesonide multimatrix vs placebo achieved endoscopic remission [ulcerative colitis disease activity index mucosal appearance subscale score of 0; 20.0% vs 12.3%; p = 0.02] and histological healing [27.0% vs 17.5%; p = 0.02]. Adverse event rates were similar [budesonide multimatrix, 31.8%; placebo, 27.1%]. Mean morning cortisol concentrations decreased at Weeks 2, 4, and 8 with budesonide multimatrix but remained within the normal range. CONCLUSION: Budesonide multimatrix was safe and efficacious for inducing clinical and endoscopic remission for mild to moderate ulcerative colitis refractory to oral mesalamine therapy.

Repeat Treatment With Rifaximin Is Safe and Effective in Patients With Diarrhea-Predominant Irritable Bowel Syndrome.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Few treatments have demonstrated efficacy and safety for diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-D). A phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was performed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of repeat treatment with the nonsystemic antibiotic rifaximin. METHODS: The trial included adults with IBS-D, mean abdominal pain and bloating scores of 3 or more, and loose stool, located at 270 centers in the United States and Europe from February 2012 through June 2014. Those responding to a 2-week course of open-label rifaximin 550 mg 3 times daily, who then relapsed during an observation phase (up to 18 weeks), were randomly assigned to groups given repeat treatments of rifaximin 550 mg or placebo 3 times daily for 2 weeks. The primary end point was percentage of responders after first repeat treatment, defined as a decrease in abdominal pain of ≥30% from baseline and a decrease in frequency of loose stools of ≥50% from baseline, for 2 or more weeks during a 4-week post-treatment period. RESULTS: Of 1074 patients (44.1%) who responded to open-label rifaximin, 382 (35.6%) did not relapse and 692 (64.4%) did; of these, 636 were randomly assigned to receive repeat treatment with rifaximin (n = 328) or placebo (n = 308). The percentage of responders was significantly greater with rifaximin than placebo (38.1% vs 31.5%; P = .03). The percentage of responders for abdominal pain (50.6% vs 42.2%; P = .018) was significantly greater with rifaximin than placebo, but not stool consistency (51.8% vs 50.0%; P = .42). Significant improvements were also noted for prevention of recurrence, durable response, and bowel movement urgency. Adverse event rates were low and similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In a phase 3 study of patients with relapsing symptoms of IBS-D, repeat rifaximin treatment was efficacious and well tolerated. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01543178.

Once-daily mesalamine granules for maintaining remission of ulcerative colitis: pooled analysis of efficacy, safety, and prognostic factors.

OBJECTIVES: A capsule formulation of mesalamine granules (MG) was developed for once-daily dosing and better compliance. The study aim was to evaluate MG efficacy and tolerability in maintaining ulcerative colitis (UC) remission. METHODS: Pooled analysis of 2 identical phase 3, randomized, double-blind trials of once-daily MG 1.5 g or placebo for up to 6 months. The primary endpoint was percentage of patients remaining relapse-free at month 6 versus placebo. Relapse was defined as revised Sutherland Disease Activity Index (SDAI) rectal bleeding score ≥1 and mucosal appearance score ≥2, UC flare, or UC-related adverse event (AE). RESULTS: Data were pooled for patients receiving MG (n = 373) and placebo (n = 189). Significantly more patients were relapse-free at 6 months with MG (79.4%) than placebo (62.4%; P < 0.001) and across subgroups based on select demographic and baseline characteristics (P < 0.05). Secondary outcome measures including rectal bleeding, physician rating of disease activity, stool frequency, total SDAI score, and relapse-free duration favored MG (P < 0.01). Common AEs with MG and placebo, respectively, were headache (10.9% and 7.6%), diarrhea (7.9% and 7.0%), and abdominal pain (6.3% and 6.5%). CONCLUSION: Once-daily MG was more efficacious than and as well tolerated as placebo in maintaining UC remission. ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00744016 and NCT00767728.

Once-daily Mesalamine Formulation for Maintenance of Remission in Ulcerative Colitis: A Randomized, Placebo-controlled Clinical Trial.

GOALS: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of mesalamine granules 1.5 g once daily for maintenance of ulcerative colitis (UC) remission. BACKGROUND: Mesalamine is a first-line treatment for induction and maintenance of UC remission. STUDY: A phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of patients with a history of mild to moderate UC, currently in remission, who received mesalamine granules once daily for 6 months. The primary efficacy endpoint was percentage of patients maintaining UC remission at 6 months. RESULTS: A significantly greater percentage of patients receiving mesalamine granules versus placebo were in remission at 6 months (79.9% vs. 66.7%; P=0.03). A greater percentage of patients receiving mesalamine granules maintained a revised Sutherland Disease Activity Index (SDAI)≤2 with no individual component of revised SDAI>1 and rectal bleeding=0 at 6 months (72.0% vs. 58.1%; P=0.04). No significant differences between groups were observed for change from baseline to 6 months for total SDAI score or its components (ie, stool frequency, rectal bleeding, mucosal appearance, physician's rating of disease). Mesalamine granules treatment resulted in a significantly longer remission duration versus placebo (P=0.02) and decreased patients' risk of relapse by 43% (hazard ratio=0.57; 95% confidence interval, 0.35-0.93; P=0.02). Mesalamine granules were well tolerated, and adverse events related to hepatic, renal, and pancreatic function-potential concerns with long-term treatment-occurred at a rate similar to placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily mesalamine granules are efficacious and safe for the maintenance of UC remission.

Long-Term Benefit of Mesalamine Granules for Patients Who Achieved Corticosteroid-Induced Ulcerative Colitis Remission.

BACKGROUND: Patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) who achieve remission with corticosteroids often relapse after tapering or discontinuation; alternative treatments limiting steroid exposure and UC relapse would be beneficial. It remains uncertain whether patients with corticosteroid-induced remission experience benefit with mesalamine granules (MG), a locally acting aminosalicylate extended-release capsule formulation for maintenance of UC remission in adults. AIMS: Efficacy and safety of MG 1.5 g once daily was evaluated in patients with UC in corticosteroid-induced remission. METHODS: Data from patients with previous corticosteroid use to achieve baseline UC remission were analyzed from two 6-month randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials and a 24-month open-label extension (OLE). Six-month relapse-free rates were assessed using the revised Sutherland Disease Activity Index. UC-related adverse events (AEs) were recorded during the 30 months. RESULTS: Included were 158 steroid-treated patients in UC remission (MG, n = 105; placebo, n = 53) and 74/105 MG-treated patients who continued MG in the OLE. A significantly larger percentage of patients remained relapse-free at 6 months with MG (77.1 %) versus placebo (54.7 %; P = 0.006), with a 55 % reduction in relapse risk (hazard ratio [HR] 0.45; 95 % CI 0.25-0.79). There was a similar (49.2 %) reduction in risk of UC-related AEs at 6 months (HR 0.51; 95 % CI 0.31-0.84; P = 0.009) that was sustained during the OLE. CONCLUSIONS: MG 1.5 g once daily administered for maintenance of corticosteroid-induced remission was associated with low risk of relapse and UC-related AEs. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: NCT00744016, NCT00767728, and NCT00326209.

Efficacy and Safety of Methylnaltrexone for Opioid-Induced Constipation in Patients With Chronic Noncancer Pain: A Placebo Crossover Analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In patients with chronic noncancer pain, subcutaneous methylnaltrexone for opioid-induced constipation (OIC) was examined in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) followed by an open-label extension (OLE). This study examined the reproducibility of RCT findings by analyzing data from placebo-treated patients who crossed over to methylnaltrexone. METHODS: Adults with less than 3 weekly rescue-free bowel movements (RFBMs), taking 50 mg or more of an oral morphine equivalent per day, were randomized to receive methylnaltrexone 12 mg or placebo for 4 weeks, followed by open-label methylnaltrexone 12 mg as needed for 8 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 134 placebo-treated patients (median morphine equivalent dose, 150 mg/d; mean of 1.1 RFBM per week) crossed over to methylnaltrexone in OLE. During the RCT, 9.7% of placebo-treated patients experienced an RFBM within 4 hours of first dose and 9.0% of all placebo injections resulted in an RFBM within 4 hours compared with 45.9% and 34.5%, respectively, with methylnaltrexone treatment in the OLE. When expressed as percentage of patients experiencing 3 or more RFBMs per week and a 1-RFBM increase over baseline, weekly values ranged from 35% to 40% during placebo treatment; at week 5 of OLE methylnaltrexone, this percentage increased to more than 70% and remained relatively stable throughout the OLE. The most common adverse events during methylnaltrexone treatment were abdominal pain (9.7% vs 1.5% for placebo) and nausea (5.2% vs 6.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Findings during placebo treatment further establish the profile of OIC and support that little or no gastrointestinal tolerance develops across time. Findings under open-label conditions established the reproducibility and durability of methylnaltrexone for OIC.

Analysis of opioid-mediated analgesia in Phase III studies of methylnaltrexone for opioid-induced constipation in patients with chronic noncancer pain.

BACKGROUND: Subcutaneous methylnaltrexone is efficacious and well tolerated for opioid-induced constipation (OIC) but may theoretically disrupt opioid-mediated analgesia. METHODS: Opioid use, pain intensity, and opioid withdrawal (Objective Opioid Withdrawal Scale [OOWS] and Subjective Opiate Withdrawal Scale [SOWS] scores) were reported in a randomized, double-blind trial with an open-label extension (RCT) and an open-label trial (OLT) evaluating safety in adults with chronic noncancer pain. In the RCT, patients taking ≥50 mg of oral morphine equivalents daily with <3 rescue-free bowel movements weekly received methyl naltrexone 12 mg once daily (n=150), every other day (n=148), or placebo (n=162) for 4 weeks, followed by open-label methylnaltrexone 12 mg (as needed [prn]; n=364) for 8 weeks. In the OLT, patients (n=1,034) on stable opioid doses with OIC received methylnaltrexone 12 mg prn for up to 48 weeks. RESULTS: Minimal fluctuations of median morphine equivalent dose from baseline (BL) were observed in the RCT double-blind period (BL, 154.8-161.0 mg/d; range, 137.1-168.0 mg/d), RCT open-label period (BL, 156.3-174.6; range, 144.0-180.0) and OLT (BL, 120 mg/d; range, 117.3-121.1 mg/d). No significant change from BL in pain intensity score occurred in any group at weeks 2 or 4 (both P≥0.1) of the RCT double-blind period, and scores remained stable during the open-label period and in the OLT (mean change, -0.2 to 0.1). Changes from BL in OOWS and SOWS scores during the double-blind period were not significantly impacted by methylnaltrexone exposure at weeks 2 or 4 (P>0.05 for all). CONCLUSION: Methylnaltrexone did not affect opioid-mediated analgesia in patients with chronic noncancer pain and OIC.

Budesonide Foam Has a Favorable Safety Profile for Inducing Remission in Mild-to-Moderate Ulcerative Proctitis or Proctosigmoiditis.

BACKGROUND: Budesonide foam, a rectally administered, second-generation corticosteroid with extensive hepatic first-pass metabolism, is efficacious for the treatment of mild-to-moderate ulcerative proctitis and ulcerative proctosigmoiditis. AIM: The aim of this study was to comprehensively assess the safety and pharmacokinetic profile of budesonide foam. METHODS: Data from five phase III studies were pooled to further evaluate safety, including an open-label study (once-daily treatment for 8 weeks), an active-comparator study (once-daily treatment for 4 weeks), and two placebo-controlled studies and an open-label extension study (twice-daily treatment for 2 weeks, then once daily for 4 weeks). Data from the placebo-controlled studies and two phase I studies (i.e., patients with mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis and healthy volunteers) were pooled to evaluate the pharmacokinetics of budesonide foam. RESULTS: A similar percentage of patients reported adverse events in the budesonide foam and placebo groups, with the majority of adverse events being mild or moderate in intensity (93.3 vs 96.0%, respectively). Adverse events occurred in 41.4 and 36.3% of patients receiving budesonide foam and placebo, respectively. Mean morning cortisol concentrations remained within the normal range for up to 8 weeks of treatment; there were no clinically relevant effects of budesonide foam on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis. Population pharmacokinetic analysis demonstrated low systemic exposure after budesonide foam administration. CONCLUSIONS: This integrated analysis demonstrated that budesonide foam for the induction of remission of distal ulcerative colitis is safe overall, with no clinically relevant effects on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis.

Development and validation of a biomarker for diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome in human subjects.

Diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is diagnosed through clinical criteria after excluding "organic" conditions, and can be precipitated by acute gastroenteritis. Cytolethal distending toxin B (CdtB) is produced by bacteria that cause acute gastroenteritis, and a post-infectious animal model demonstrates that host antibodies to CdtB cross-react with vinculin in the host gut, producing an IBS-like phenotype. Therefore, we assessed circulating anti-CdtB and anti-vinculin antibodies as biomarkers for D-IBS in human subjects. Subjects with D-IBS based on Rome criteria (n=2375) were recruited from a large-scale multicenter clinical trial for D-IBS (TARGET 3). Subjects with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) (n=142), subjects with celiac disease (n=121), and healthy controls (n=43) were obtained for comparison. Subjects with IBD and celiac disease were recruited based on the presence of intestinal complaints and histologic confirmation of chronic inflammatory changes in the colon or small intestine. Subjects with celiac disease were also required to have an elevated tTG and biopsy. All subjects were aged between 18 and 65 years. Plasma levels of anti-CdtB and anti-vinculin antibodies were determined by ELISA, and compared between groups. Anti-CdtB titers were significantly higher in D-IBS subjects compared to IBD, healthy controls and celiac disease (P<0.001). Anti-vinculin titers were also significantly higher in IBS (P<0.001) compared to the other groups. The area-under-the-receiver operating curves (AUCs) were 0.81 and 0.62 for diagnosis of D-IBS against IBD for anti-CdtB and anti-vinculin, respectively. Both tests were less specific in differentiating IBS from celiac disease. Optimization demonstrated that for anti-CdtB (optical density≥2.80) the specificity, sensitivity and likelihood ratio were 91.6%, 43.7 and 5.2, respectively, and for anti-vinculin (OD≥1.68) were 83.8%, 32.6 and 2.0, respectively. These results confirm that anti-CdtB and anti-vinculin antibodies are elevated in D-IBS compared to non-IBS subjects. These biomarkers may be especially helpful in distinguishing D-IBS from IBD in the workup of chronic diarrhea.

Fixed-Dose Subcutaneous Methylnaltrexone in Patients with Advanced Illness and Opioid-Induced Constipation: Results of a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study and Open-Label Extension.

BACKGROUND: Subcutaneous methylnaltrexone (MNTX), dosed based on body weight, is efficacious and well tolerated in inducing bowel movements in patients with advanced illness and opioid-induced constipation (OIC); however, fixed-dose administration of MNTX may improve ease of administration. OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to assess safety and efficacy of fixed-dose MNTX in two phase 4 trials. METHODS: In a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial (RCT), patients with advanced illness and OIC received MNTX (8 mg or 12 mg by body weight [38 kg to <62 kg or ≥62 kg, respectively]) or placebo every other day (QOD) for two weeks. Patients completing the RCT could enroll in an open-label extension (OLE) study with MNTX administered as needed (PRN). The primary endpoint was percentage of patients with a rescue-free bowel movement (RFBM) within four hours after ≥2 of the first 4 doses in the first week. RESULTS: In the RCT, 116 and 114 patients received MNTX and placebo, respectively, and 149 patients continued to the OLE study. The percentage of patients achieving primary endpoint was 62.9% and 9.6% for MNTX and placebo groups, respectively (p<0.0001). Median time to RFBM after the first dose was 0.8 hour and 23.6 hours in MNTX and placebo groups, respectively (p<0.0001). Efficacy results during the OLE study were consistent with the RCT. MNTX demonstrated a favorable safety profile in the RCT and OLE study. CONCLUSION: Fixed-dose MNTX administered QOD in the RCT and PRN in the OLE study demonstrated robust efficacy and was well tolerated in treating OIC in patients with advanced illness.

Budesonide foam induces remission in patients with mild to moderate ulcerative proctitis and ulcerative proctosigmoiditis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Budesonide is a high-potency, second-generation corticosteroid designed to minimize systemic adverse consequences of conventional corticosteroids. We performed 2 randomized, phase 3 trials to evaluate the ability of budesonide rectal foam, formulated to optimize retention and provide uniform delivery of budesonide to the rectum and distal colon, to induce remission in patients with ulcerative proctitis or ulcerative proctosigmoiditis. METHODS: Two identically designed, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials evaluated the efficacy of budesonide foam for induction of remission in 546 patients with mild to moderate ulcerative proctitis or ulcerative proctosigmoiditis who received budesonide foam 2 mg/25 mL twice daily for 2 weeks, then once daily for 4 weeks, or placebo. RESULTS: Remission at week 6 occurred significantly more frequently among patients receiving budesonide foam than placebo (Study 1: 38.3% vs 25.8%; P = .0324; Study 2: 44.0% vs 22.4%; P < .0001). A significantly greater percentage of patients receiving budesonide foam vs placebo achieved rectal bleeding resolution (Study 1: 46.6% vs 28.0%; P = .0022; Study 2: 50.0% vs 28.6%; P = .0002) and endoscopic improvement (Study 1: 55.6% vs 43.2%; P = .0486; Study 2: 56.0% vs 36.7%; P = .0013) at week 6. Most adverse events occurred at similar frequencies between groups, although events related to changes in cortisol values were reported more frequently with budesonide foam. There were no cases of clinically symptomatic adrenal insufficiency. CONCLUSIONS: Budesonide rectal foam was well tolerated and more efficacious than placebo in inducing remission in patients with mild to moderate ulcerative proctitis and ulcerative proctosigmoiditis. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01008410 and NCT01008423.

Perceptions of human cadaver dissection by medical students: a highly valued experience.

Cadaver dissection remains a cornerstone in the study of anatomical sciences by medical students. However, this activity can cause emotions that may affect learning outcomes. This study, which involved medical students of various cultural backgrounds, assessed their responses to dissection. Medicine I year students (n = 100) at Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine were invited to complete a questionnaire after the first week of dissection, and again at the end of the course. The questionnaire asked for demographics, and assessed the students' appraisal of their dissection experience, cultural influences, coping activities and learning outcomes. After the first week of dissection, most of the students found the experience challenging, stimulating, exciting and informative, rather than nauseating or unbearable. Still, some students found the experience anxiety-provoking, especially when they thought about human mortality. Cultural background influenced the students' emotional development as they worked through the course. Most of the participants agreed that dissection promotes teamwork, familiarity with the human body, and integration of the theoretical knowledge with practical application. At the end of the course, dissection was significantly less anxiety-provoking, and, interestingly, the study found that culture and religious beliefs became more important to the students. Most students agreed that dissection is important, relevant, and necessary, and has the potential to improve learning outcomes that are essential to the development of physicians. The study suggests that an introductory course in social, behavioral and ethical considerations be presented at the beginning of the medical curriculum.

Efficacy and Tolerability of Subcutaneous Methylnaltrexone in Patients with Advanced Illness and Opioid-Induced Constipation: A Responder Analysis of 2 Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Subcutaneous methylnaltrexone is efficacious and well tolerated in inducing bowel movements in patients with advanced illness and opioid-induced constipation (OIC); factors determining optimal responsiveness to OIC treatment, however, have not been elucidated. This post hoc responder analysis examined the influence of demographic and baseline characteristics on methylnaltrexone efficacy and tolerability in this population. METHODS: Data were pooled from 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 studies of subcutaneous methylnaltrexone (0.15 and 0.30 mg/kg) [ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: Study 301 - NCT00401362; Study 302 - NCT00402038]. Subgroup analyses of the primary outcome, percentage of patients with rescue medication-free bowel movements (RFBM) within 4 hours of first dose, were conducted for age, sex, primary diagnosis, baseline constipation-related distress score, and baseline oral morphine equivalent dose. RESULTS: More than 50% of 165 patients treated with either methylnaltrexone dose experienced a RFBM within 4 hours vs. 14.6% of 123 placebo-treated patients (P < 0.0001 for both methylnaltrexone doses vs. placebo). Methylnaltrexone response was significantly greater than placebo response in all subgroups (P < 0.01). The largest differences vs. placebo were observed for patients taking methylnaltrexone 0.30 mg/kg with a noncancer primary diagnosis (70.0% [methylnaltrexone] vs. 12.8% [placebo]; P < 0.001) and for patients taking methylnaltrexone 0.30 mg/kg maintained on ≥ 150 mg/day baseline morphine equivalent doses (73.3% vs. 16.7%; P < 0.0001). Common adverse events were abdominal pain (pooled methylnaltrexone: 27.9%, placebo: 9.8%), flatulence (13.3%, 5.7%), and nausea (10.9%, 4.9%). Tolerability was comparable across subgroups. CONCLUSION: Subcutaneous methylnaltrexone provides a rapid, robust, and consistent RFBM response in patients with advanced illness and OIC. Methylnaltrexone 0.30 mg/kg may elicit particularly favorable responses in select patient populations.

Long-term safety and tolerability of once-daily mesalamine granules in the maintenance of remission of ulcerative colitis.

BACKGROUND: Ulcerative colitis (UC), a chronic, relapsing, and remitting inflammatory bowel disease, requires long-term treatment to maintain remission. In this study, the long-term safety and tolerability of mesalamine granules (MG) therapy was evaluated in the maintenance of UC remission. Previous prospective studies evaluating different oral mesalamine formulations have not exceeded a duration of 14 months. METHODS: A phase 3, multicenter, 24-month, open-label extension study evaluating MG 1.5 g once daily in patients who achieved previous remission from mild to moderate UC was performed. Eligible patients had successfully participated in 1 of 2 previous 6-month double-blind, placebo-controlled trials or were new patients in remission. Safety assessments included monitoring of adverse events (AEs) and clinical laboratory tests. Risk of UC recurrence was assessed by the occurrence of UC-related AEs. RESULTS: Of the 393 patients enrolled (280 from the double-blind studies; 113 new patients), 388 were included in the safety population. The most common AEs included nasopharyngitis (13.9%), headache (11.6%), and diarrhea (10.8%), and the incidence of these events was generally lower in the MG group versus historical placebo group from the double-blind studies. Pancreatic, renal, and hepatic AEs occurred in 23 patients (5.9%). The risk of UC-related AEs was low and was maintained for 24 months during the open-label study. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily MG has a favorable safety profile for the maintenance of remission for up to 2 years in patients with UC.

Rifaximin is safe and well tolerated for long-term maintenance of remission from overt hepatic encephalopathy.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Rifaximin is a gut-selective, oral antimicrobial agent shown to reduce the recurrence of overt hepatic encephalopathy (HE) and HE-related hospitalizations in a 6-month, randomized, controlled trial (RCT). We performed a phase 3, open-label maintenance study to assess the safety and rate of hospitalization with long-term rifaximin use. METHODS: We conducted a 24-month, open-label maintenance study of rifaximin (550 mg, twice daily) in patients with HE who participated in the previous RCT of rifaximin or new patients enrolled from March 2007 to December 2010. Safety was assessed (adverse events, clinical laboratory parameters) for the integrated population of all patients, who were given rifaximin 550 mg twice daily (all-rifaximin population, N = 392). Safety and hospitalization data were compared between the group given placebo in the original RCT (n = 159) and those given rifaximin (n = 140). RESULTS: In the all-rifaximin population, the median exposure to rifaximin was 427.0 days (range, 2-1427 d), with 510.5 person-years of exposure. The profile and rate of adverse events with long-term rifaximin treatment were similar to those of the original RCT. There was no increase in the rate of infections, including with Clostridium difficile, or development of bacterial antibiotic resistance. Rates of hospitalizations with long-term rifaximin administration remained low: the HE-related hospitalization rate, normalized for exposure (0.21; all-rifaximin population), was similar to that of the rifaximin group in the original RCT (0.30), and lower than that for the placebo group (0.72). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term treatment (≥24 mo) with rifaximin (550 mg, twice daily) appears to provide a continued reduction in the rate of HE-related and all-cause hospitalization, without an increased rate of adverse events. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT00686920.

Efficacy and safety of crofelemer for noninfectious diarrhea in HIV-seropositive individuals (ADVENT trial): a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, two-stage study.

BACKGROUND: HIV-associated diarrhea remains a significant concern with limited treatment options. OBJECTIVE: To determine the optimal dose, efficacy, and safety of crofelemer for noninfectious diarrhea. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial used a 2-stage design. Both stages included 2-week screening, 4-week placebo-controlled treatment, and 20-week placebo-free (open-label) extension phases. In stage I, 196 HIV-seropositive patients with chronic diarrhea were randomized to crofelemer 125 mg, 250 mg, or 500 mg or placebo twice daily. Using a prospective analysis, the 125-mg twice-daily dose was selected for stage II. In stage II, 180 new patients were randomized to crofelemer 125 mg twice daily or placebo for 4 weeks. Primary efficacy analysis was the percentage of patients (stages I/II combined) who achieved clinical response (defined as ≤2 watery stools/week during ≥2 of 4 weeks). During the placebo-free extension phase, response (≤2 watery stools) was assessed weekly. RESULTS: Significantly more patients receiving crofelemer 125 mg achieved clinical response versus placebo (17.6% vs 8.0%; one-sided, P = .01). Crofelemer 125 mg resulted in a greater change from baseline in number of daily watery bowel movements (P = .04) and daily stool consistency score (P = .02) versus placebo. During the placebo-free extension phase, percentages of weekly responders ranged from 40% to 56% at weeks 11 to 24. Crofelemer was minimally absorbed, well tolerated, did not negatively impact clinical immune parameters, and had a safety profile comparable to placebo. CONCLUSIONS: In HIV-seropositive patients taking stable antiretroviral therapy, crofelemer provided significant improvement in diarrhea with a favorable safety profile.

Rifaximin therapy for patients with irritable bowel syndrome without constipation.

BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that gut flora may play an important role in the pathophysiology of the irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). We evaluated rifaximin, a minimally absorbed antibiotic, as treatment for IBS. METHODS: In two identically designed, phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (TARGET 1 and TARGET 2), patients who had IBS without constipation were randomly assigned to either rifaximin at a dose of 550 mg or placebo, three times daily for 2 weeks, and were followed for an additional 10 weeks. The primary end point, the proportion of patients who had adequate relief of global IBS symptoms, and the key secondary end point, the proportion of patients who had adequate relief of IBS-related bloating, were assessed weekly. Adequate relief was defined as self-reported relief of symptoms for at least 2 of the first 4 weeks after treatment. Other secondary end points included the percentage of patients who had a response to treatment as assessed by daily self-ratings of global IBS symptoms and individual symptoms of bloating, abdominal pain, and stool consistency during the 4 weeks after treatment and during the entire 3 months of the study. RESULTS: Significantly more patients in the rifaximin group than in the placebo group had adequate relief of global IBS symptoms during the first 4 weeks after treatment (40.8% vs. 31.2%, P=0.01, in TARGET 1; 40.6% vs. 32.2%, P=0.03, in TARGET 2; 40.7% vs. 31.7%, P<0.001, in the two studies combined). Similarly, more patients in the rifaximin group than in the placebo group had adequate relief of bloating (39.5% vs. 28.7%, P=0.005, in TARGET 1; 41.0% vs. 31.9%, P=0.02, in TARGET 2; 40.2% vs. 30.3%, P<0.001, in the two studies combined). In addition, significantly more patients in the rifaximin group had a response to treatment as assessed by daily ratings of IBS symptoms, bloating, abdominal pain, and stool consistency. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients who had IBS without constipation, treatment with rifaximin for 2 weeks provided significant relief of IBS symptoms, bloating, abdominal pain, and loose or watery stools. (Funded by Salix Pharmaceuticals; ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00731679 and NCT00724126.).

How to treat a difficult-to-anesthetize patient. Twelve alternatives to the traditional inferior alveolar nerve block.

In the case of the difficult-to-anesthetize patient, the inferior alveolar nerve can be particularly challenging In those patients, other approaches may be necessary to achieve profound anesthesia. This article presents techniques that may be used in those efforts. The clinician can change his target slightly, or increase the dosage of anesthetic. Accessory innervation by lingual and mylohyoid nerves sometimes needs to be addressed. Some standard alternative approaches are Gow-Gates and Varizani-Akinosi injections. Intraosseous and intraligamentary injections should be considered. For lower anteriors, infiltration and incisive nerve blocks can be effective. Slight changes in armamentarium, such as increasing the needle gauge, can be helpful. Twelve approaches that can be used instead of or as an adjunct to, the traditional Halstead injection are described.

Prevention of travelers' diarrhea with rifaximin in US travelers to Mexico.

BACKGROUND: Because bacterial pathogens are the primary cause of travelers' diarrhea (TD), antibiotic prophylaxis is effective in TD prevention. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of the nonsystemic antibiotic rifaximin in preventing TD in US travelers to Mexico. METHODS: Healthy adult students traveling to Mexico received rifaximin 600 mg/d or placebo for 14 days and were followed for 7 days post-treatment. Stool pattern and gastrointestinal symptoms were recorded in daily diary entries. The primary end point was prevention of TD during 14 days of treatment measured by time to first unformed stool. RESULTS: A total of 210 individuals received rifaximin (n = 106) or placebo (n = 104) and were included in the safety population. Median age was 21 years (range, 18-75 y), and the majority of participants were female (65%). Efficacy analyses were conducted in a modified intent-to-treat population of 201 patients who received rifaximin (n = 99) or placebo (n = 102). Rifaximin prophylaxis reduced risk of developing TD versus placebo (p < 0.0001). A smaller percentage of individuals who received rifaximin versus placebo developed all-cause TD (20% vs 48%, respectively; p < 0.0001) or TD requiring antibiotic therapy (14% vs 32%, respectively; p = 0.003). More individuals in the rifaximin group (76%) completed treatment without developing TD versus those in the placebo group (51%; p = 0.0004). Rifaximin provided a 58% protection rate against TD and was associated with fewer adverse events than placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic treatment with rifaximin 600 mg/d for 14 days safely and effectively reduced the risk of developing TD in US travelers to Mexico. Rifaximin chemoprevention should be considered for TD in appropriate individuals traveling to high-risk regions.