RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Mesalamine is one of the most-used drugs in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), especially ulcerative colitis. Regulatory agencies have listed mesalamine as an unsafe drug in subjects with glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency based on the risk of hemolysis, although scientific evidence is lacking. The occurrence of acute and/or chronic hemolytic anemia in IBD patients with G6PD deficiency exposed to mesalamine was evaluated. METHODS: In this multicenter study, IBD patients with G6PD deficiency (cases) receiving mesalamine were retrospectively evaluated for acute, and prospectively for chronic, hemolysis. The presence of hemolytic anemia was based on red blood cell and reticulocyte count, hemoglobin, lactate dehydrogenase, unconjugated bilirubin, and haptoglobin levels. Cases were compared with controls (IBD patients with normal G6PD). RESULTS: A total of 453 IBD patients (mean age 52.1 ± 16.0 years; 58.5% female) were enrolled. Ulcerative colitis was present in 75% of patients. G6PD deficiency was detected in 17% of patients. Oral mesalamine was used in 67.9% of ulcerative colitis and in 32.4% of Crohn's disease cases. None of the 78 IBD patients with G6PD deficiency receiving mesalamine underwent hospitalization or specific treatment for acute hemolytic anemia. Relevant differences in chronic hemolysis markers were not observed in 30 cases compared with 112 controls receiving mesalamine (≤4500 mg/day). Marker modifications were also observed in mesalamine-free cases, consistent with the basal rate of erythrophagocytosis in G6PD deficiency. Ex vivo experiments showed the release of methemoglobin by G6PD deficient RBCs upon mesalamine challenge, only above 2.5 mg/mL, a concentration never reached in the clinical setting. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides, for the first time, evidence that mesalamine is safe in G6PD deficiency at a dosage of up to 4500 mg/day.
RESUMEN
Alterations of intestinal microflora are involved in the pathogenesis and natural history of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs). Manipulation of human gut microbiota with probiotics may be a therapeutic option. In this retrospective cohort study, the benefits of probiotic use in reducing adverse events were analyzed. Data from clinical charts of IBD patients followed up for at least 36 months were retrieved. The occurrence of adverse events including the need for systemic steroids, hospitalization, and surgery related to IBD was analyzed according to age, gender, body mass index, treatments, IBD phenotype, disease duration, and probiotic use. The amount of probiotic use was calculated as the ratio of time under probiotic treatment to the disease duration starting from the date of the first probiotic administration and expressed as a percentage. Patients were stratified according to the percentage of probiotic use as ≤ 24%, 25-74%, and ≥ 75%, and the number of adverse events per patient-years was calculated. Results were adjusted for Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) by multivariate analysis including study variables. Data from 200 patients (78 CD, 122 UC; 117 females; mean age 40.6 ± 15.3 years; mean disease duration 12.1 ± 8.7 years) were available. CD patients taking probiotics for 25-74% of the disease duration experienced a 64% reduction in total adverse events. The need for systemic steroids, hospitalization, and surgery dropped to zero events per person-year in UC patients and decreased by 93% (p < 0.001) in CD patients taking probiotics for ≥ 75% of the disease duration. Our findings suggest that the use of probiotics may be an additional therapeutic tool in patients with IBD.