Randomized Placebo-Controlled Phase 3 Trial of Vibrating Capsule for Chronic Constipation.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Despite therapeutic advances, effective treatments for chronic constipation remain an unmet need. The vibrating capsule is a nonpharmacologic, orally ingested, programmable capsule that vibrates intraluminally to induce bowel movements. We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of the vibrating capsule in patients with chronic constipation. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of patients with chronic constipation, who were randomized to receive either a vibrating or placebo capsule, once daily, 5 days a week for 8 weeks. The primary efficacy end points were an increase of 1 or more complete spontaneous bowel movements per week (CSBM1 responder) or 2 or more CSBMs per week (CSBM2) from baseline during at least 6 of the 8 weeks. Safety analyses were performed. RESULTS: Among 904 patients screened, 312 were enrolled. A greater percentage of patients receiving the vibrating capsule achieved both primary efficacy end points compared with placebo (39.3% vs 22.1%, P = .001 for CSBM1; 22.7% vs 11.4% P = .008 for CSBM2). Significantly greater improvements were seen with the vibrating capsule for the secondary end points of straining, stool consistency, and quality-of-life measures compared with placebo. Adverse events were mild, gastrointestinal in nature, and similar between groups, except that a mild vibrating sensation was reported by 11% of patients in the vibrating capsule group, but none withdrew from the trial. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with chronic constipation, the vibrating capsule was superior to placebo in improving bowel symptoms and quality of life. The vibrating capsule was safe and well tolerated. (Clinical trials.gov, Number: NCT03879239).

American Gastroenterological Association-American College of Gastroenterology Clinical Practice Guideline: Pharmacological Management of Chronic Idiopathic Constipation.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC) is a common disorder associated with significant impairment in quality of life. This clinical practice guideline, jointly developed by the American Gastroenterological Association and the American College of Gastroenterology, aims to inform clinicians and patients by providing evidence-based practice recommendations for the pharmacological treatment of CIC in adults. METHODS: The American Gastroenterological Association and the American College of Gastroenterology formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel that conducted systematic reviews of the following agents: fiber, osmotic laxatives (polyethylene glycol, magnesium oxide, lactulose), stimulant laxatives (bisacodyl, sodium picosulfate, senna), secretagogues (lubiprostone, linaclotide, plecanatide), and serotonin type 4 agonist (prucalopride). The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes and used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework to assess the certainty of evidence for each intervention. The Evidence to Decision framework was used to develop clinical recommendations based on the balance between the desirable and undesirable effects, patient values, costs, and health equity considerations. RESULTS: The panel agreed on 10 recommendations for the pharmacological management of CIC in adults. Based on available evidence, the panel made strong recommendations for the use of polyethylene glycol, sodium picosulfate, linaclotide, plecanatide, and prucalopride for CIC in adults. Conditional recommendations were made for the use of fiber, lactulose, senna, magnesium oxide, and lubiprostone. DISCUSSION: This document provides a comprehensive outline of the various over-the-counter and prescription pharmacological agents available for the treatment of CIC. The guidelines are meant to provide a framework for approaching the management of CIC; clinical providers should engage in shared decision making based on patient preferences as well as medication cost and availability. Limitations and gaps in the evidence are highlighted to help guide future research opportunities and enhance the care of patients with chronic constipation.

Abdominal Symptom Improvement During Clinical Trials of Tenapanor in Patients With Irritable Bowel Syndrome With Constipation: A Post Hoc Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: This post hoc analysis evaluated the efficacy of tenapanor on abdominal symptoms in patients with irritable bowel syndrome with constipation. Abdominal symptoms assessed included pain, discomfort, bloating, cramping, and fullness. METHODS: The abdominal symptom data were pooled from 3 randomized controlled trials (NCT01923428, T3MPO-1 [NCT02621892], and T3MPO-2 [NCT02686138]). Weekly scores were calculated for each abdominal symptom, and the Abdominal Score (AS) was derived as the average of weekly scores for abdominal pain, discomfort, and bloating. The overall change from baseline during the 12 weeks was assessed for each symptom weekly score and the AS. The AS 6/12-week and 9/12-week response rates (AS improvement of ≥2 points for ≥6/12- or ≥9/12-week) were also evaluated. The association of weekly AS response status (reduction of ≥30%) with weekly complete spontaneous bowel movement (CSBM) status (=0 and >0) was assessed. RESULTS: Among 1,372 patients (684 tenapanor [50 mg twice a day] and 688 placebo), the least squares mean change from baseline in AS was -2.66 for tenapanor vs -2.09 for placebo ( P < 0.0001). The 6/12-week AS response rate was 44.4% for tenapanor vs 32.4% for placebo ( P < 0.0001), and for 9/12-week AS, 30.6% for tenapanor vs 20.5% for placebo ( P < 0.0001). A significant association between weekly CSBM status and weekly AS response status was observed each week ( P < 0.0001), with a greater proportion achieving an AS reduction in patients with >0 CSBMs in a week. DISCUSSION: Tenapanor significantly reduced abdominal symptoms in patients with irritable bowel syndrome with constipation, particularly pain, discomfort, and bloating measured by AS, compared with placebo.

How Would You Manage This Patient With Recurrent Diverticulitis? : Grand Rounds Discussion From Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.

Acute diverticulitis, which refers to inflammation or infection, or both, of a colonic diverticulum, is a common medical condition that may occur repeatedly in some persons. It most often manifests with left-sided abdominal pain, which may be associated with low-grade fever and other gastrointestinal symptoms. Complications may include abscess, fistula formation, perforation, and bowel obstruction. The American College of Physicians recently published practice guidelines on the diagnosis and management of acute diverticulitis, the role of colonoscopy after resolution, and interventions to prevent recurrence of this condition. Among the recommendations were the use of abdominal computed tomography (CT) scanning in cases where there was diagnostic uncertainty, initial management of uncomplicated cases in the outpatient setting without antibiotics, referral for colonoscopy after an initial episode if not performed recently, and discussion of elective surgery to prevent recurrent disease in patients with complicated diverticulitis or frequent episodes of uncomplicated disease. Here, 2 gastroenterologists with expertise in acute diverticulitis debate CT scanning for diagnosis, antibiotics for treatment, colonoscopy to screen for underlying malignancy, and elective surgery to prevent recurrent disease.

Up-Front Endoscopy Maximizes Cost-Effectiveness and Cost-Satisfaction in Uninvestigated Dyspepsia.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Practice guidelines promote a routine noninvasive, non-endoscopic initial approach to investigating dyspepsia without alarm features in young patients, yet many patients undergo prompt upper endoscopy. We aimed to assess tradeoffs among costs, patient satisfaction, and clinical outcomes to inform discrepancy between guidelines and practice. METHODS: We constructed a decision-analytic model and performed cost-effectiveness/cost-satisfaction analysis over a 1-year time horizon on patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia without alarm features referred to gastroenterology. A RAND/UCLA expert panel informed model design. Four competing diagnostic/management strategies were evaluated: prompt endoscopy, testing for Helicobacter pylori and eradicating if present (test-and-treat), testing for H pylori and performing endoscopy if present (test-and-scope), and empiric acid suppression. Outcomes were derived from systematic reviews of clinical trials. Costs were informed by prospective observational cohort studies and national commercial/federal cost databases. Health gains were represented using quality-adjusted life years. RESULTS: From the patient perspective, costs and outcomes were similar for all strategies (maximum out-of-pocket difference of $30 and <0.01 quality-adjusted life years gained/year regardless of strategy). Prompt endoscopy maximized cost-satisfaction and health system reimbursement. Test-and-scope maximized cost-effectiveness from insurer and patient perspectives. Results remained robust on multiple one-way sensitivity analyses on model inputs and across most willingness-to-pay thresholds. CONCLUSIONS: Noninvasive management strategies appear to result in inferior cost-effectiveness and patient satisfaction outcomes compared with strategies promoting up-front endoscopy. Therefore, additional studies are needed to evaluate the drivers of patient satisfaction to facilitate inclusion in value-based healthcare transformation efforts.

American Gastroenterological Association-American College of Gastroenterology Clinical Practice Guideline: Pharmacological Management of Chronic Idiopathic Constipation.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC) is a common disorder associated with significant impairment in quality of life. This clinical practice guideline, jointly developed by the American Gastroenterological Association and the American College of Gastroenterology, aims to inform clinicians and patients by providing evidence-based practice recommendations for the pharmacological treatment of CIC in adults. METHODS: The American Gastroenterological Association and the American College of Gastroenterology formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel that conducted systematic reviews of the following agents: fiber, osmotic laxatives (polyethylene glycol, magnesium oxide, lactulose), stimulant laxatives (bisacodyl, sodium picosulfate, senna), secretagogues (lubiprostone, linaclotide, plecanatide), and serotonin type 4 agonist (prucalopride). The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes and used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework to assess the certainty of evidence for each intervention. The Evidence to Decision framework was used to develop clinical recommendations based on the balance between the desirable and undesirable effects, patient values, costs, and health equity considerations. RESULTS: The panel agreed on 10 recommendations for the pharmacological management of CIC in adults. Based on available evidence, the panel made strong recommendations for the use of polyethylene glycol, sodium picosulfate, linaclotide, plecanatide, and prucalopride for CIC in adults. Conditional recommendations were made for the use of fiber, lactulose, senna, magnesium oxide, and lubiprostone. DISCUSSION: This document provides a comprehensive outline of the various over-the-counter and prescription pharmacological agents available for the treatment of CIC. The guidelines are meant to provide a framework for approaching the management of CIC; clinical providers should engage in shared decision making based on patient preferences as well as medication cost and availability. Limitations and gaps in the evidence are highlighted to help guide future research opportunities and enhance the care of patients with chronic constipation.

Dysphagia Worsens With Increasing Ineffective Swallows Among Patients With Ineffective Esophageal Motility.

INTRODUCTION: Ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) is the most common motility disorder identified on esophageal high-resolution manometry (HRM), but patients with this finding may be asymptomatic. Therefore, we aimed to identify specific HRM findings predictive of symptoms in IEM. METHODS: Adult patients (≥18 y) who underwent HRM between March 2016 and July 2019 were retrospectively evaluated and reclassified according to Chicago Classification 4.0 (CC4.0). Demographic information, HRM parameters, and gastroesophageal reflux disease Health-Related Quality of Life Questionnaire responses were captured among those with normal manometry or IEM. We evaluated the association between heartburn, regurgitation, and dysphagia, with respect to HRM findings including ineffective swallows. RESULTS: Of 379 patients, 243 (64.1%) had a normal manometry, 136 (35.9%) were on IEM spectrum, and 73 (19.3%) had conclusive IEM by CC4.0. Mean dysphagia scores were significantly higher in those with conclusive IEM compared with those with normal HRM (2.00 vs. 1.36, P =0.002), as was the percentage of individuals reporting dysphagia affecting daily activities (21.9% vs. 11.4%, P =0.02). Heartburn and regurgitation symptoms did not differ between groups. In a multivariable model of IEM patients, the percentage of ineffective swallows independently predicted a higher dysphagia burden (ß regression coefficient: 0.032, P =0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Applying the CC4.0 definition for conclusive IEM identifies a group of patients with worse dysphagia symptoms. Within this group, the percentage of ineffective swallows was an independent predictor of dysphagia severity. These findings may help practitioners and patients contextualize the heterogeneous diagnosis of IEM.

Efficacy of Tenapanor in Treating Patients With Irritable Bowel Syndrome With Constipation: A 26-Week, Placebo-Controlled Phase 3 Trial (T3MPO-2).

INTRODUCTION: Tenapanor is a first-in-class, minimally absorbed, small-molecule inhibitor of the gastrointestinal sodium/hydrogen exchanger isoform 3. This phase 3 trial assessed the long-term efficacy and safety of tenapanor 50 mg b.i.d. for the treatment of patients with irritable bowel syndrome with constipation (IBS-C). METHODS: In this randomized double-blind study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02686138), patients with IBS-C received tenapanor 50 mg b.i.d. or placebo b.i.d. for 26 weeks. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who had a reduction of ≥30.0% in average weekly worst abdominal pain and an increase of ≥1 weekly complete spontaneous bowel movement from baseline, both in the same week, for ≥6 of the first 12 treatment weeks (6/12-week combined responder). RESULTS: Of the 620 randomized patients with IBS-C, 593 (95.6%) were included in the intention-to-treat analysis set (tenapanor: n = 293; placebo: n = 300) and 481 patients (77.6%) completed the 26-week treatment period. In the intention-to-treat analysis set (mean age: 45.4 years; 82.1% women), a significantly greater proportion of patients treated with tenapanor were 6/12-week combined responders than those treated with placebo (36.5% vs 23.7%; P < 0.001). Abdominal symptoms and global symptoms of IBS were significantly improved with tenapanor compared with placebo. Diarrhea, the most common adverse event, was typically transient and mild to moderate in severity. Diarrhea led to study drug discontinuation for 19 (6.5%) and 2 patients (0.7%) receiving tenapanor and placebo, respectively. DISCUSSION: Tenapanor 50 mg b.i.d. improved IBS-C symptoms over 26 weeks and was generally well tolerated, offering a potential new long-term treatment option for patients with IBS-C (see Visual abstract, Supplementary Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/AJG/B797).

Efficacy of Tenapanor in Treating Patients With Irritable Bowel Syndrome With Constipation: A 12-Week, Placebo-Controlled Phase 3 Trial (T3MPO-1).

OBJECTIVES: Tenapanor is a first-in-class, minimally absorbed, small-molecule inhibitor of the gastrointestinal sodium/hydrogen exchanger isoform 3. This phase 3 trial assessed the efficacy and safety of tenapanor 50 mg b.i.d. for the treatment of patients with constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-C). METHODS: In this phase 3, double-blind study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02621892), patients with IBS-C were randomized to tenapanor 50 mg b.i.d. or placebo b.i.d. for 12 weeks followed by a 4-week randomized withdrawal period. The primary efficacy variable was the proportion of patients who reported a reduction in average weekly worst abdominal pain of ≥30.0% and an increase of ≥1 complete spontaneous bowel movement from baseline, both in the same week, for ≥6 weeks of the 12-week treatment period. RESULTS: Of the 629 randomized patients with IBS-C, 606 (96.3%) were included in the intention-to-treat analysis set (tenapanor: n = 307; placebo: n = 299) and 533 (84.7%) completed the 12-week treatment period. In the intention-to-treat analysis set (mean age 45 years, 81.4% women), a significantly greater proportion of patients treated with tenapanor met the primary endpoint than patients treated with placebo (27.0% vs 18.7%, P = 0.020). Abdominal symptoms and global symptoms of IBS also improved with tenapanor (P < 0.05 vs placebo). Diarrhea was the most commonly reported adverse event, resulting in study drug discontinuation in 6.5% and 0.7% of patients receiving tenapanor and placebo, respectively, during the 12-week treatment period. DISCUSSION: Tenapanor 50 mg b.i.d. improved IBS-C symptoms and was generally well tolerated, offering a potential new treatment option for patients with IBS-C.

Eluxadoline for Irritable Bowel Syndrome with Diarrhea.

Background Effective and safe treatments are needed for patients who have irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) with diarrhea. We conducted two phase 3 trials to assess the efficacy and safety of eluxadoline, a new oral agent with mixed opioid effects (µ- and κ-opioid receptor agonist and δ-opioid receptor antagonist), in patients with IBS with diarrhea. Methods We randomly assigned 2427 adults who had IBS with diarrhea to eluxadoline (at a dose of 75 mg or 100 mg) or placebo twice daily for 26 weeks (IBS-3002 trial) or 52 weeks (IBS-3001 trial). The primary end point was the proportion of patients who had a composite response of decrease in abdominal pain and improvement in stool consistency on the same day for at least 50% of the days from weeks 1 through 12 and from weeks 1 through 26. Results For weeks 1 through 12, more patients in the eluxadoline groups (75 mg and 100 mg) than in the placebo group reached the primary end point (IBS-3001 trial, 23.9% with the 75-mg dose and 25.1% with the 100-mg dose vs. 17.1% with placebo; P=0.01 and P=0.004, respectively; IBS-3002 trial, 28.9% and 29.6%, respectively, vs. 16.2%; P<0.001 for both comparisons). For weeks 1 through 26, the corresponding rates in IBS-3001 were 23.4% and 29.3% versus 19.0% (P=0.11 and P<0.001, respectively), and the corresponding rates in IBS-3002 were 30.4% and 32.7% versus 20.2% (P=0.001 and P<0.001, respectively). The most common adverse events associated with 75 mg of eluxadoline and 100 mg of eluxadoline, as compared with placebo, were nausea (8.1% and 7.5% vs. 5.1%), constipation (7.4% and 8.6% vs. 2.5%), and abdominal pain (5.8% and 7.2% vs. 4.1%). Pancreatitis developed in 5 (2 in the 75-mg group and 3 in the 100-mg group) of the 1666 patients in the safety population (0.3%). Conclusions Eluxadoline is a new therapeutic agent that reduced symptoms of IBS with diarrhea in men and women, with sustained efficacy over 6 months in patients who received the 100-mg dose twice daily. (Funded by Furiex Pharmaceuticals, an affiliate of Allergan; IBS-3001 and IBS-3002 ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT01553591 and NCT01553747 , respectively.).

Safety of Endoscopy in Heritable Connective Tissue Disorders.

INTRODUCTION: Little is known about the gastrointestinal manifestations or safety of endoscopy among patients with heritable connective tissue disorders such as Marfan syndrome or Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (EDS). METHODS: We conducted an electronic cross-sectional survey nested within preexisting registries of patients with heritable connective tissue disorders and examined self-reported rates of endoscopic complications. RESULTS: The rate of endoscopy-related perforation was 9.4% (95% confidence interval 2.0%-25.0%) among individuals with vascular EDS, <1% in classical and hypermobility-type EDS, and zero in Marfan syndrome (P < 0.001). Spontaneous intestinal perforation was also significantly higher in the vascular EDS group. DISCUSSION: Clinicians should consider noninvasive screening methods for patients with vascular EDS.

Low-Dose Linaclotide (72 µg) for Chronic Idiopathic Constipation: A 12-Week, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVES: Linaclotide is a guanylate cyclase-C agonist approved in the United States, Canada, and Mexico at a once-daily 145-µg dose for the treatment of chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC); a once-daily 72-µg dose for CIC recently received FDA approval. The trial objective was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a 72-µg linaclotide dose in CIC patients. METHODS: This double-blind, placebo-controlled trial randomized patients with CIC (Rome III criteria) to once-daily linaclotide 72 µg or 145 µg, or placebo for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint, 12-week complete spontaneous bowel movement (CSBM) overall responder, required patients to have ≥3 CSBMs and an increase of ≥1 CSBM per week from baseline in the same week for ≥9 of 12 weeks of the treatment period. Secondary endpoints included 12-week change from baseline in bowel (SBM and CSBM frequency, stool consistency, straining) and abdominal (bloating, discomfort) symptoms, monthly CSBM responders, and 12-week CSBM responders among patients who averaged >1 SBM/week at baseline. Sustained response (12-week CSBM overall responders who met weekly criteria for 3 of the 4 final weeks (weeks 9-12) of treatment) was evaluated as an additional endpoint. Adverse events (AEs) were monitored. RESULTS: The intent-to-treat population included 1,223 patients (mean age=46 years, female=77%, white=71%). The primary endpoint was met by 13.4% of linaclotide 72-µg patients vs. 4.7% of placebo patients (P<0.0001, odds ratio=3.0; statistically significant controlling for multiplicity). Sustained response was achieved by 12.4% of linaclotide 72-µg patients vs. 4.2% of placebo patients (nominal P<0.0001). Linaclotide 72-µg patients met 9-of-10 secondary endpoints vs. placebo (P<0.05; abdominal discomfort, P=0.1028). Patients treated with linaclotide 145 µg also improved CIC symptoms for the primary (12.4%) and sustained responder endpoint parameters (11.4%) and for all 10 of the secondary endpoint parameters including abdominal discomfort (P<0.05). Diarrhea, the most common AE, was mild in most instances and resulted in discontinuation of 0, 2.4%, and 3.2% of patients in the placebo, linaclotide 72-µg, and linaclotide 145-µg groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily linaclotide 72 µg significantly improved CIC symptoms in both men and women with a low rate of discontinuation due to diarrhea over 12 weeks of treatment.

Bowel Disorders.

Functional bowel disorders are highly prevalent disorders found worldwide. These disorders have the potential to affect all members of society, regardless of age, gender, race, creed, color or socioeconomic status. Improving our understanding of functional bowel disorders (FBD) is critical as they impose a negative economic impact to the global health care system in addition to reducing quality of life. Research in the basic and clinical sciences during the past decade has produced new information on the epidemiology, etiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis and treatment of FBDs. These important findings created a need to revise the Rome III criteria for FBDs, last published in 2006. This manuscript classifies the FBDs into five distinct categories: irritable bowel syndrome (IBS); functional constipation (FC); functional diarrhea (FDr); functional abdominal bloating/distention (FAB/D); and unspecified FBD (U-FBD). Also included in this article is a new sixth category, opioid induced constipation (OIC) which is distinct from the functional bowel disorders (FBDs). Each disorder will first be defined, followed by sections on epidemiology, rationale for changes from prior criteria, clinical evaluation, physiologic features, psychosocial features and treatment. It is the hope of this committee that this new information will assist both clinicians and researchers in the decade to come.

Rome IV Diagnostic Questionnaires and Tables for Investigators and Clinicians.

The Rome IV Diagnostic Questionnaires were developed to screen for functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs), serve as inclusion criteria in clinical trials, and support epidemiological surveys. Separate questionnaires were developed for adults, children/adolescents, and infants/toddlers. For the adult questionnaire, we first surveyed 1,162 adults without gastrointestinal disorders, and recommended the 90th percentile symptom frequency as the threshold for defining what is abnormal. Diagnostic questions were formulated and verified with clinical experts using a recursive process. The diagnostic sensitivity of the questionnaire was tested in 843 patients from 9 gastroenterology clinics, with a focus on clinical diagnoses of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), functional constipation (FC), and functional dyspepsia (FD). Sensitivity was 62.7% for IBS, 54.7% for FD, and 32.2% for FC. Specificity, assessed in a population sample of 5,931 adults, was 97.1% for IBS, 93.3% for FD, and 93.6% for FC. Excess overlap among IBS, FC, and FD was a major contributor to reduced diagnostic sensitivity, and when overlap of IBS with FC was permitted, sensitivity for FC diagnosis increased to 73.2%. All questions were understandable to at least 90% of individuals, and Rome IV diagnoses were reproducible in ¾ of patients after one month. Validation of the pediatric questionnaires is ongoing.

Tenapanor Treatment of Patients With Constipation-Predominant Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Phase 2, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Efficacy and Safety Trial.

OBJECTIVES: Tenapanor is a first-in-class, small-molecule inhibitor of the gastrointestinal sodium/hydrogen exchanger NHE3. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of tenapanor in patients with constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-C). METHODS: In this phase 2, double-blind study, patients with IBS-C (Rome III criteria) were randomized (1:1:1:1) to receive tenapanor 5 mg, 20 mg, or 50 mg b.i.d., or placebo b.i.d. for 12 weeks. The primary end point was the complete spontaneous bowel movement (CSBM) responder rate, defined as the proportion of patients reporting an increase from baseline of ≥1 CSBM/week for ≥6/12 treatment weeks. Secondary end points included abdominal symptom responder rates (≥30% score improvement from baseline for ≥6/12 weeks) and a composite responder rate (CSBM and abdominal pain response in the same week for ≥6/12 weeks). RESULTS: Overall, 356 patients were randomized (mean age: 45.7 years; 86.8% women) and 304 completed the study. The CSBM responder rate was significantly higher in the tenapanor 50 mg b.i.d. group than in the placebo group (60.7 vs. 33.7%; P<0.001), as was the composite responder rate (50.0 vs. 23.6%; P<0.001). Responder rates for abdominal symptoms (pain, discomfort, bloating, cramping, and fullness) were significantly higher in the tenapanor 50 mg b.i.d. group than in the placebo group (all P<0.05). Diarrhea was the most frequent adverse event (tenapanor b.i.d.: 20 mg, 12.4%; 50 mg, 11.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Tenapanor 50 mg b.i.d. significantly increased stool frequency and reduced abdominal symptoms in patients with IBS-C. Further research into tenapanor as a potential treatment for these patients is justified.

Corrigendum: Eluxadoline Efficacy in IBS-D Patients Who Report Prior Loperamide Use.

This corrects the article DOI: 10.1038/ajg.2017.72.

Eluxadoline Efficacy in IBS-D Patients Who Report Prior Loperamide Use.

OBJECTIVES: Irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhea (IBS-D) is often managed with over-the-counter therapies such as loperamide, though with limited success. This analysis evaluated the efficacy of eluxadoline in patients previously treated with loperamide in two phase 3 studies. METHODS: Adults with IBS-D (Rome III criteria) were enrolled and randomized to placebo or eluxadoline (75 or 100 mg) twice daily for 26 (IBS-3002) or 52 (IBS-3001) weeks. Patients reported loperamide use over the previous year and recorded their rescue loperamide use during the studies. The primary efficacy end point was the proportion of patients with a composite response of simultaneous improvement in abdominal pain and reduction in diarrhea. RESULTS: A total of 2,428 patients were enrolled; 36.0% reported prior loperamide use, of whom 61.8% reported prior inadequate IBS-D symptom control with loperamide. Among patients with prior loperamide use, a greater proportion treated with eluxadoline (75 and 100 mg) were composite responders vs. those treated with placebo with inadequate prior symptom control, over weeks 1-12 (26.3% (P=0.001) and 27.0% (P<0.001) vs. 12.7%, respectively); similar results were observed over weeks 1-26. When daily rescue loperamide use was imputed as a nonresponse day, the composite responder rate was still higher in patients receiving eluxadoline (75 and 100 mg) vs. placebo over weeks 1-12 (P<0.001) and weeks 1-26 (P<0.001). Adverse events included nausea and abdominal pain. CONCLUSIONS: Eluxadoline effectively and safely treats IBS-D symptoms of abdominal pain and diarrhea in patients who self-report either adequate or inadequate control of their symptoms with prior loperamide treatment, with comparable efficacy and safety irrespective of the use of loperamide as a rescue medication during eluxadoline treatment.