Chemoprevention of colonic polyps with balsalazide: an exploratory, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: A number of agents, including aspirin, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors, folic acid, calcium, and vitamins, have been evaluated for their potential in chemoprevention of sporadic colorectal adenomas or cancer. Preclinical data suggest that 5-aminosalicylates also may have a chemopreventive effect. AIM: To investigate chemoprevention of colonic polyps with balsalazide, a 5-aminosalicylate prodrug. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, adults diagnosed with small polyps in the rectosigmoid colon were treated with either balsalazide 3 g/d or placebo for 6 months. Follow-up lower endoscopy was performed, and all polyps were measured and analyzed histologically. The primary endpoint was reduction in mean size of the largest polyp per subject. RESULTS: Among 241 participants screened, 86 were randomized to treatment, with 75 subjects evaluable. Balsalazide 3 g/d (n = 38) did not significantly reduce the mean size of the largest colonic polyp or the number of polyps compared with placebo (n = 37). Although not significant, post-hoc analysis revealed that total adenoma burden per subject, calculated as the sum of the volumes of all adenomas in mm3, increased by 55% in the balsalazide group compared with 95% in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Although balsalazide did not have significant chemopreventive effects on established colonic polyps, these results can aid in designing future prospective studies.

An open-label evaluation of rifaximin in the treatment of active Crohn's disease.

OBJECTIVE: This open-label study was conducted as a preliminary assessment of rifaximin (200 mg TID for 16 weeks) for the treatment of active Crohn's disease in patients (n = 29) with symptoms for at least 3 months before screening and a Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) score > 220 and < 400. RESULTS: At the end of month 4, mean +/- CDAI score was reduced by 43% compared with baseline in the intent-to-treat population (n = 29; baseline = 278 +/- 51; month 4 = 159 +/- 102; p < 0.0001 month 4 versus baseline). A similar pattern of results was observed in the per-protocol population (i.e., patients at least 70% compliant with the treatment regimen and having no protocol violations thought to affect efficacy results; n = 16), in which mean CDAI scores at month 4 were reduced by 41% from a baseline of 262.9 +/- 38.2 to 155.6 +/- 104.5 (p = 0.0009 month 4 versus baseline). Fifty-nine percent of patients (59%) had a > or = 70-point improvement in CDAI score beginning with the first assessment at the end of month 1. By the end of the treatment period, 78% of patients had a > or = 70-point improvement in CDAI score. Clinical remission, defined as CDAI score < 150, was observed at the end of treatment months 1, 2, 3, and 4 in 41%, 56%, 56%, and 59% of patients, respectively. Twenty-three (23) patients completed the 4-month course of rifaximin therapy, and 6 prematurely withdrew. The most common adverse events were abdominal pain, fatigue, and headache. CONCLUSION: These data, which are consistent with the possibility that rifaximin may be useful for active Crohn's disease, warrant confirmation in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

Balsalazide is superior to mesalamine in the time to improvement of signs and symptoms of acute mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis.

OBJECTIVE: Balsalazide is a novel azo-bonded 5-aminosalicylic acid treatment for mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis. The study objective was to compare symptomatic remission rates with balsalazide and mesalamine while controlling for extent of disease and time since diagnosis in patients with active, mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis. METHODS: A total of 173 patients with sigmoidoscopically verified ulcerative colitis were randomized to 8 wk of double-blind treatment with balsalazide 6.75 g/day or mesalamine 2.4 g/day. Both treatments provided 2.4 g/day of oral 5-aminosalicylic acid. Patients maintained symptom diaries throughout the treatment period. RESULTS: Overall, 46% of balsalazide- and 44% of mesalamine-treated patients achieved symptomatic remission. Higher response rates were noted in newly diagnosed patients with < or = 40 cm of disease (68% vs 61%) than in recently relapsed patients with >40 cm of disease (36% vs 25%). The median time to symptomatic remission was 12 days shorter with balsalazide (25 days) than with mesalamine (37 days). Significantly more balsalazide patients showed sigmoidoscopic (p = 0.002), stool frequency (p = 0.006), rectal bleeding (p = 0.006), and physician's global assessment score (p = 0.013) improvement by 14 days than did mesalamine patients. Similar proportions of patients reported adverse events (54% vs 64%), which were most commonly related to the gastrointestinal and central and peripheral nervous systems. CONCLUSIONS: Balsalazide is an effective and safe treatment for mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis. Improvement of symptoms occurs considerably earlier with balsalazide than with mesalamine.

A randomized, double blind, dose-response comparison of balsalazide (6.75 g), balsalazide (2.25 g), and mesalamine (2.4 g) in the treatment of active, mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis.

OBJECTIVE: Balsalazide is a new innovative, mesalamine-containing prodrug that is activated by bacteria in the colon. Balsalazide has been shown previously to be well tolerated and effective in the treatment of acute ulcerative colitis. The aim of this study was to determine the dose-response of balsalazide for efficacy and safety in active, mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis and to compare this profile with that of mesalamine, pH-dependent, delayed-release tablets. METHODS: A multicenter, randomized, active control, double-blind, double-dummy, dose-response, parallel-group study was performed comparing balsalazide (6.75 g daily), balsalazide (2.25 g daily), and mesalamine (2.4 g daily), administered for 8 wk to 154 patients with active, mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis as verified by sigmoidoscopy. RESULTS: Eight weeks of treatment with 6.75 g of balsalazide daily provided significantly greater improvement than did balsalazide (2.25 g daily) in rectal bleeding (64.7% [6.75-g balsalazide] vs 32.4% [2.25-g balsalazide], p < 0.006), stool frequency (58.8% vs 29.4%, p < 0.006), sigmoidoscopic score (78.9% vs 52.5%, p < 0.015), and Physician's Global Assessment (73.7% vs 51.3%, p < 0.03). The efficacy of balsalazide showed a significantly more rapid onset of action than that of mesalamine (2.4 g daily) (2-wk sigmoidocopic score improvement, 54.7% [6.75-g balsalazide] vs 29.4% [2.4-g mesalamine], p = 0.006) with numerically greater improvement at 8 wk in five of seven measured signs and symptoms. Balsalazide (6.75 g daily) was well tolerated, and the safety profile did not differ significantly from that of balsalazide (2.25 g daily) or mesalamine. CONCLUSIONS: Eight weeks of treatment with balsalazide (6.75 g daily) is significantly more effective than balsalazide (2.25 g daily) and more rapid in onset than mesalamine (2.4 g daily) in improving signs and symptoms of acute ulcerative colitis. Balsalazide (6.75 g daily) is well tolerated, and the safety profile does not differ from that of balsalazide (2.25 g daily) and mesalamine (2.4 g daily).