Methotrexate in combination with infliximab is no more effective than infliximab alone in patients with Crohn's disease.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Methotrexate and infliximab are effective therapies for Crohn's disease (CD). In the combination of maintenance methotrexate-infliximab trial, we evaluated the potential superiority of combination therapy over infliximab alone. METHODS: In a 50-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we compared methotrexate and infliximab with infliximab alone in 126 patients with CD who had initiated prednisone induction therapy (15-40 mg/day) within the preceding 6 weeks. Patients were assigned randomly to groups given methotrexate at an initial weekly dose of 10 mg, escalating to 25 mg/week (n = 63), or placebo (n = 63). Both groups received infliximab (5 mg/kg of body weight) at weeks 1, 3, 7, and 14, and every 8 weeks thereafter. Prednisone was tapered, beginning at week 1, and discontinued no later than week 14. The primary outcome was time to treatment failure, defined as a lack of prednisone-free remission (CD Activity Index, <150) at week 14 or failure to maintain remission through week 50. RESULTS: Patients' baseline characteristics were similar between groups. By week 50, the actuarial rate of treatment failure was 30.6% in the combination therapy group compared with 29.8% in the infliximab monotherapy group (P = .63; hazard ratio, 1.16; 95% confidence interval, 0.62-2.17). Prespecified subgroup analyses failed to show a benefit in patients with short disease duration or an increased level of C-reactive protein. No clinically meaningful differences were observed in secondary outcomes. Combination therapy was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of infliximab and methotrexate, although safe, was no more effective than infliximab alone in patients with CD receiving treatment with prednisone. ClincialTrials.gov number, NCT00132899.

Omega-3 free fatty acids for the maintenance of remission in Crohn disease: the EPIC Randomized Controlled Trials.

CONTEXT: Maintenance therapy for Crohn disease features the use of immunosuppressive drugs, which are associated with an increased risk of infection. Identification of safe and effective maintenance strategies is a priority. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the oral administration of omega-3 free fatty acids is more effective than placebo for prevention of relapse of Crohn disease. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies (Epanova Program in Crohn's Study 1 [EPIC-1] and EPIC-2) conducted between January 2003 and February 2007 at 98 centers in Canada, Europe, Israel, and the United States. Data from 363 and 375 patients with quiescent Crohn disease were evaluated in EPIC-1 and EPIC-2, respectively. INTERVENTIONS: Patients with a Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) score of less than 150 were randomly assigned to receive either 4 g/d of omega-3 free fatty acids or placebo for up to 58 weeks. No other treatments for Crohn disease were permitted. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Clinical relapse, as defined by a CDAI score of 150 points or greater and an increase of more than 70 points from the baseline value, or initiation of treatment for active Crohn disease. RESULTS: For EPIC-1, 188 patients were assigned to receive omega-3 free fatty acids and 186 patients to receive placebo. Corresponding numbers for EPIC-2 were 189 and 190 patients, respectively. The rate of relapse at 1 year in EPIC-1 was 31.6% in patients who received omega-3 free fatty acids and 35.7% in those who received placebo (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.51-1.19; P = .30). Corresponding values for EPIC-2 were 47.8% and 48.8% (hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.67-1.21; P = .48). Serious adverse events were uncommon and mostly related to Crohn disease. CONCLUSION: In these trials, treatment with omega-3 free fatty acids was not effective for the prevention of relapse in Crohn disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifiers: EPIC-1: NCT00613197, EPIC-2: NCT00074542.

Efficacy and safety of mesalamine 1 g HS versus 500 mg BID suppositories in mild to moderate ulcerative proctitis: a multicenter randomized study.

BACKGROUND: Ulcerative proctitis (UP) usually presents as fresh rectal bleeding. Successful treatment using topical mesalamine 5-aminosalicyclic acid (5-ASA) 500 mg BID suppository led to developing a once-a-day formulation that could contribute to better acceptability and ease of use by patients. The objective of this randomized trial, conducted in 18 centers, was to compare efficacy of 2 modes of treatment with 5-ASA suppositories. METHODS: Ninety-nine patients with mild or moderate UP limited to 15 cm of the anal margin, evidenced by a disease activity index (DAI) between 4 and 11, were randomized to 5-ASA 500 mg suppository (Canasa; Axcan Pharma) BID or 1 g at bedtime (HS) for 6 weeks. The study used a noninferiority hypothesis based on the mean difference in DAI values after 6 weeks of treatment on an intent-to-treat basis using analysis of covariance. DAI was derived from a composite of the measures of stool frequency, rectal bleeding, mucosal visualization at endoscopy, and general well being. RESULTS: There was no difference between groups at baseline for demographic and clinical parameters. Mean DAIs fell from 6.6 +/- 1.5 (SD) to 1.6 +/- 2.3 in the 500 mg BID group (n = 48) and from 6.1 +/- 1.5 to 1.3 +/- 2.2 in the 1 g HS group (n = 39). There was no significant difference (P = 0.74) in mean DAI at week 6 between the 2 groups. Both groups showed a significant reduction (P < 0.0001) in DAI over the course of the 6 weeks. Both formulations showed effectiveness in reducing each individual component of the DAI. There was no significant difference between treatments in adverse events, and both groups had an overall drug compliance of greater than 95%. CONCLUSION: This study showed that 1 g HS and 500 mg BID mesalamine suppository treatments of UP patients were equivalent in all facets of efficacy, safety, and compliance in a 6-week trial.

A randomized trial comparing seven-day ranitidine bismuth citrate and clarithromycin dual therapy to seven-day omeprazole, clarithromycin and amoxicillin triple therapy for the eradication of Helicobacter pylori.

OBJECTIVE: To assess Helicobacter pylori eradication after one week dual ranitidine bismuth citrate-clarithromycin (RBC-C) or triple omeprazole, clarithromycin and amoxicillin (OCA) therapy. METHODS: In this multicentre Canadian trial, H pylori-positive patients with functional dyspepsia or inactive peptic ulcer disease were randomized to open-label treatment with RBC-C (ranitidine bismuth citrate 400 mg plus clarithromycin 500 mg) or OCA (omezaprole 20 mg, clarithromycin 500 mg and amoxicillin 1000 mg), given twice a day for seven days. Treatment allocation was randomly assigned. H pylori infection was confirmed by positive 13C-urea breath test (13C-UBT). H pylori status was reassessed by UBT at least four and 12 weeks after treatment (negative: d13CO2 below 3.5 per mil). Intention-to-treat (ITT) eradication rates were determined for all patients with confirmed H pylori infection. Per protocol (PP) rate was determined for all patients treated with at least two evaluable follow-up visits. RESULTS: Three hundred five patients were included in the ITT and 222 in the PP analysis. The ITT eradication rates were 66% for RBC-C and 78% for OCA. The PP success rates were 84% for RBC-C and 96% for OCA. The difference for both ITT 12% (95% CI 2 to 22) and PP 12% (95% CI 4 to 19) were statistically significant, P=0.030 and P=0.007, respectively. Treatment was generally well tolerated. CONCLUSION: The eradication rate for the seven-day dual RBC-C regimen was lower than that for OCA.