Similar Efficacy of Mesalazine in Adult and Older Adult Ulcerative Colitis Patients: Post Hoc Analysis of a Randomized Noninferiority Trial of 1600 mg vs 400 mg Tablets.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy data on treatment in older adults are scarce, while the greatest increase in ulcerative colitis (UC) prevalence is observed in age groups of individuals 40 to 65 years of age and ≥65 years of age. AIM: We assessed the difference in rates of clinical and endoscopic response and remission in UC adults (≤60 years) and older adults (>60 years) treated with mesalazine. METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of data from a phase 3 noninferiority trial of 817 UC patients treated with mesalazine for 8 and additional 26 weeks in a double-blind and open-label study, respectively. We used Wilcoxon rank sum or chi-square test to analyze differences between groups and multivariable logistic regression to determine the associations between endoscopic remission as outcome (Mayo endoscopic subscore [MES] = 0 or ≤1) and independent variables including disease duration, baseline MES, age, sex, comedications, and comorbidities. RESULTS: Older adults had a longer disease duration, a higher number of comorbidities, concomitant medications, and higher baseline MES (2.38 ±â€…0.486 in older adults vs 2.26 ±â€…0.439 in adults; P = .008) compared with adults. We observed no difference in rates of combined clinical and endoscopic remission, clinical remission and response, and endoscopic remission and response at week 8 and 38 post-treatment. In addition to other well-known predictors of worse outcome, patients with ≥3 comedications were less likely to achieve an MES = 0 at week 8 and 38 and an MES ≤1 at week 38. CONCLUSIONS: We observed similar efficacy of mesalazine in adult and older adult UC patients. The increased comedication number rather than age may decrease effectiveness of UC medications, highlighting the importance of healthy aging.

We investigated the rates of clinical and endoscopic response in adult (≤60 years) and older adult (>60 years) ulcerative colitis patients treated with oral mesalazine; our results demonstrated that age did not influence the efficacy and safety.

Assessing the Clinical and Endoscopic Efficacy of Extended Treatment Duration with Different Doses of Mesalazine for Mild-to-Moderate Ulcerative Colitis beyond 8 Weeks of Induction.

Introduction: High-strength mesalazine formulations play an important role in providing a convenient option to increase the dose in ulcerative colitis (UC) patients and therefore avoiding the switch to another therapeutic class. Higher doses of mesalazine may be required during periods of remission in order to prevent relapse. Aim: The aim of the study was to investigate clinical outcomes of three mesalazine maintenance doses adapted for post induction response. Methods: In this post hoc analysis, 675 UC patients entered an open-label extension study for a total of 38 weeks (including 8-12 week induction period with 3.2 g/day mesalazine). After the induction period, they were separated into three groups: remitters (in clinical and endoscopic remission), responders (decrease in Partial Mayo Clinic Score of ≥2 points and ≥30% from week 0), and nonresponders (failed to achieve endoscopic or clinical response at week 8) and received 1.6 g/day, 3.2 g/day, or 4.8 g/day of mesalazine (using a new 1,600 mg mesalazine tablet), respectively. Results: 133/202 (65.8%), 108/274 (39.4%), and 59/199 (29.6%) patients achieved clinical and endoscopic remission at week 38 with 1.6 g/day, 3.2 g/day, and 4.8 g/day, respectively. At week 38, 142/202 (70.3%), 93/274 (33.9%), and 61/199 (30.7%) patients achieved clinical remission (stool score of 0 and rectal bleeding score of 0) with 1.6 g/day, 3.2 g/day, and 4.8 g/day, respectively. Conclusions: Patients partially responding or not responding to an initial induction dose of 3.2 g/day mesalazine could benefit from an extended treatment period at the same dose, or an increase to 4.8 g/day in an attempt to achieve combined clinical and endoscopic remission.

Medication Formulation Preference of Mild and Moderate Ulcerative Colitis Patients: a European Survey.

Introduction: Patient adherence is a major challenge for the successful management of any chronic disease, and ulcerative colitis (UC) is no exception. Patient adherence is closely related to patient preference of medication and formulation used. Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate patient and physician perspectives around UC treatment preference. Methods: This study was conducted in France, Germany, Spain, and the UK. Physicians and UK inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) nurses answered an online questionnaire. In addition, adult mild-to-moderate UC patients, treated with oral mesalazine, were invited to answer a 30-min online survey which included a conjoint exercise. Results: 400 patients, 160 physicians, and 20 IBD nurses participated in the survey. 68% of patients were taking tablets and 32% granules. Physicians stated that from their perspective patients are more adherent to tablets than granules (76% vs. 24%), patients tended to have better relief of symptoms with tablets (69% vs. 31%), and patients found tablets to be the most convenient formulation (61% vs. 39%). From the patients' perspective, when questioned which formulation they prefer, 58% answered tablets, 37% granules, and 5% none of these. When patients were asked about some negative attributes of tablets, the highest agreement was for "I would like to take fewer each day" (6.1/10) and "I wish I could take fewer at a time" (5.4/10). Conclusions: The majority of UC patients in this survey prefer the tablet formulation. A high strength tablet overcoming the high pill burden could be a good solution to address patient expectations.

The spectral composition of evening light and individual differences in the suppression of melatonin and delay of sleep in humans.

The effect of light on circadian rhythms and sleep is mediated by a multi-component photoreceptive system of rods, cones and melanopsin-expressing intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells. The intensity and spectral sensitivity characteristics of this system are to be fully determined. Whether the intensity and spectral composition of light exposure at home in the evening is such that it delays circadian rhythms and sleep also remains to be established. We monitored light exposure at home during 6-8wk and assessed light effects on sleep and circadian rhythms in the laboratory. Twenty-two women and men (23.1±4.7yr) participated in a six-way, cross-over design using polychromatic light conditions relevant to the light exposure at home, but with reduced, intermediate or enhanced efficacy with respect to the photopic and melanopsin systems. The evening rise of melatonin, sleepiness and EEG-assessed sleep onset varied significantly (P<0.01) across the light conditions, and these effects appeared to be largely mediated by the melanopsin, rather than the photopic system. Moreover, there were individual differences in the sensitivity to the disruptive effect of light on melatonin, which were robust against experimental manipulations (intra-class correlation=0.44). The data show that light at home in the evening affects circadian physiology and imply that the spectral composition of artificial light can be modified to minimize this disruptive effect on sleep and circadian rhythms. These findings have implications for our understanding of the contribution of artificial light exposure to sleep and circadian rhythm disorders such as delayed sleep phase disorder.

Patient Preference and Physician Perceptions of Patient Preference for Oral Pharmaceutical Formulations: Results from a Real-Life Survey.

BACKGROUND: Pharmaceutical treatment prescribed according to patient preference for a formulation may have a positive impact on adherence to treatment and consequently on treatment outcomes. AIM: This study aimed at understanding patient preference for pharmaceutical formulations and attributes that trigger patient preference and physician perception of patient preference. METHODS: Between August and September 2017, gastroenterologists and patients with mild to moderate ulcerative colitis from France, Germany, Spain, and the UK participated in an online survey. The investigation was exploratory in nature, and descriptive results are presented. RESULTS: Patient (n = 380) preference appears to be driven by the appearance (format, shape, size, and color - 44%), number of units per administration (39%), and number of administrations per day (17%). Gastroenterologist (n = 159) preference is instead driven by the number of administrations per day (55%), number of units per day (26%), and tablet size (19%). Overall, 254 (67%) patients preferred a tablet formulation, 111 (29%) preferred granules, and 15 (4%) other formulations. According to gastroenterologist perception of patient preference, only 49% of patients prefer tablets, 38% prefer granules, and 13% have no preference. After switching from granules to tablets, 25% patients expressed negative feelings for granules. However, after switching from tablets to granules, 44% of patients still have positive perceptions of tablets. Among patients receiving tablets (n = 255), 18 (7%) perceived their treatment to be not at all effective versus 16 (13%) patients receiving granules (n = 125). A similar proportion of patients in the two groups perceived their treatment as extremely effective (48 vs. 46%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Patients generally prefer tablets. Patient and gastroenterologist perception of patient preference for different oral drug formulations is triggered by the same attributes but with inverse importance. To improve adherence, patients should be involved in the choice of the treatment formulation.

Daily and seasonal variation in the spectral composition of light exposure in humans.

Light is considered the most potent synchronizer of the human circadian system and exerts many other non-image-forming effects, including those that affect brain function. These effects are mediated in part by intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells that express the photopigment melanopsin. The spectral sensitivity of melanopsin is greatest for blue light at approximately 480 nm. At present, there is little information on how the spectral composition of light to which people are exposed varies over the 24 h period and across seasons. Twenty-two subjects, aged 22+/-4 yrs (mean+/-SD) participated during the winter months (November-February), and 12 subjects aged 25+/-3 yrs participated during the summer months (April-August). Subjects wore Actiwatch-RGB monitors, as well as Actiwatch-L monitors, for seven consecutive days while living in England. These monitors measured activity and light exposure in the red, green, and blue spectral regions, in addition to broad-spectrum white light, with a 2 min resolution. Light exposure during the day was analyzed for the interval between 09:00 and 21:00 h. The time course of white-light exposure differed significantly between seasons (p = 0.0022), with light exposure increasing in the morning hours and declining in the afternoon hours, and with a more prominent decline in the winter. Overall light exposure was significantly higher in summer than winter (p = 0.0002). Seasonal differences in the relative contribution of blue-light exposure to overall light exposure were also observed (p = 0.0006), in particular during the evening hours. During the summer evenings (17:00-21:00 h), the relative contribution of blue light was significantly higher (p < 0.0001) (40.2+/-1.1%) than during winter evenings (26.6+/-0.9%). The present data show that in addition to overall light exposure, the spectral composition of light exposure varies over the day and with season.

Differences in sleep, light, and circadian phase in offshore 18:00-06:00 h and 19:00-07:00 h shift workers.

Complaints concerning sleep are high among those who work night shifts; this is in part due to the disturbed relationship between circadian phase and the timing of the sleep-wake cycle. Shift schedule, light exposure, and age are all known to affect adaptation to the night shift. This study investigated circadian phase, sleep, and light exposure in subjects working 18:00-06:00 h and 19:00-07:00 h schedules during summer (May-August). Ten men, aged 46+/-10 yrs (mean+/-SD), worked the 19:00-07:00 h shift schedule for two or three weeks offshore (58 degrees N). Seven men, mean age 41+/-12 yrs, worked the 18:00-06:00 h shift schedule for two weeks offshore (61 degrees N). Circadian phase was assessed by calculating the peak (acrophase) of the 6-sulphatoxymelatonin rhythm measured by radioimmunoassay of sequential urine samples collected for 72 h at the end of the night shift. Objective sleep and light exposure were assessed by actigraphy and subjective sleep diaries. Subjects working 18:00-06:00 h had a 6-sulphatoxymelatonin acrophase of 11.7+/-0.77 h (mean+/-SEM, decimal hours), whereas it was significantly later, 14.6+/-0.55 h (p=0.01), for adapted subjects working 19:00-07:00 h. Two subjects did not adapt to the 19:00-07:00 h night shift (6-sulphatoxymelatonin acrophases being 4.3+/-0.22 and 5.3+/-0.29 h). Actigraphy analysis of sleep duration showed significant differences (p=0.03), with a mean sleep duration for those working 19:00-07:00 h of 5.71+/-0.31 h compared to those working 18:00-06:00 h whose mean sleep duration was 6.64+/-0.33 h. There was a trend to higher morning light exposure (p=0.07) in the 19:00-07:00 h group. Circadian phase was later (delayed on average by 3 h) and objective sleep was shorter with the 19:00-07:00 h than the 18:00-06:00 h shift schedule. In these offshore conditions in summer, the earlier shift start and end time appears to favor daytime sleep.