Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 45
Filter
1.
Int J Mol Sci ; 25(11)2024 May 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38892004

ABSTRACT

Vedolizumab (VDZ) is used for treating inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients. A study investigating colonic epithelial barrier function ex vivo following VDZ is lacking. This work aims to evaluate ex vivo the colonic epithelial barrier function in IBD patients at baseline and during VDZ treatment, and to investigate the relationships between barrier function and clinical parameters. Colonic specimens were obtained from 23 IBD patients before, and at 24 and 52 weeks after VDZ treatment, and from 26 healthy volunteers (HV). Transepithelial electrical resistance (TEER, permeability to ions) and paracellular permeability were measured in Ussing chambers. IBD patients showed increased epithelial permeability to ions (TEER, 13.80 ± 1.04 Ω × cm2 vs. HV 20.70 ± 1.52 Ω × cm2, p < 0.001) without changes in paracellular permeability of a 4 kDa probe. VDZ increased TEER (18.09 ± 1.44 Ω × cm2, p < 0.001) after 52 weeks. A clinical response was observed in 58% and 25% of patients at week 24, and in 62% and 50% at week 52, in ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease, respectively. Clinical and endoscopic scores were strongly associated with TEER. TEER < 14.65 Ω × cm2 predicted response to VDZ (OR 11; CI 2-59). VDZ reduces the increased permeability to ions observed in the colonic epithelium of IBD patients before treatment, in parallel to a clinical, histological (inflammatory infiltrate), and endoscopic improvement. A low TEER predicts clinical response to VDZ therapy.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , Colon , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases , Intestinal Mucosa , Permeability , Humans , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/pharmacology , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Male , Female , Adult , Middle Aged , Permeability/drug effects , Intestinal Mucosa/drug effects , Intestinal Mucosa/metabolism , Intestinal Mucosa/pathology , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases/drug therapy , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases/metabolism , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases/pathology , Colon/drug effects , Colon/metabolism , Colon/pathology , Ions/metabolism , Gastrointestinal Agents/pharmacology , Gastrointestinal Agents/therapeutic use , Electric Impedance , Colitis, Ulcerative/drug therapy , Colitis, Ulcerative/metabolism , Colitis, Ulcerative/pathology , Crohn Disease/drug therapy , Crohn Disease/metabolism , Crohn Disease/pathology , Aged
2.
Microorganisms ; 11(6)2023 May 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37374884

ABSTRACT

Probiotics are microorganisms that confer benefits to the host, and, for this reason, they have been proposed in several pathologic states. Specifically, probiotic bacteria have been investigated as a therapeutic option in ulcerative colitis (UC) patients, but clinical results are dishomogeneous. In particular, many probiotic species with different therapeutic schemes have been proposed, but no study has investigated probiotics in monotherapy in adequate trials for the induction of remission. Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG (LGG) is the more intensively studied probiotic and it has ideal characteristics for utilization in UC patients. The aim of the present study is to investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of LGG administration in an open trial, delivered in monotherapy at two different doses, in UC patients with mild-moderate disease. The UC patients with mild-moderate disease activity (Partial Mayo score ≥ 2) despite treatment with oral mesalamine were included. The patients stopped oral mesalamine and were followed up for one month, then were randomized to receive LGG supplement at dose of 1.2 or 2.4 × 1010 CFU/day for one month. At the end of the study, the clinical activity was evaluated and compared to that at the study entrance (efficacy). Adverse events were recorded (safety). The primary end-point was clinical improvement (reduction in the Partial Mayo score) and no serious adverse events, while the secondary end-points were the evaluation of different efficacies and safeties between the two doses of LGG. The patients with disease flares dropped out of the study and went back to standard therapy. The efficacy data were analyzed in an intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) analysis. Out of the 76 patients included in the study, 75 started the probiotic therapy (n = 38 and 37 per group). In the ITT analysis, 32/76 (42%) responded to treatment, 21/76 (28%) remained stable, and 23/76 (30%) had a worsening of their clinical condition; 55 (72%) completed the treatment and were analyzed in a PP analysis: 32/55 (58%) had a clinical response, 21 (38%) remained stable, and 2 (4%) had a light worsening of their clinical condition (p < 0.0001). Overall, 37% of the patients had a disease remission. No severe adverse event was recorded, and only one patient stopped therapy due to obstinate constipation. No difference in the clinical efficacy and safety has been recorded between groups treated with different doses of LGG. The present prospective clinical trial demonstrates, for the first time, that LGG in monotherapy is safe and effective for the induction of remission in UC patients with mild-moderate disease activity (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04102852).

3.
Expert Opin Pharmacother ; 24(14): 1649-1656, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37358928

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Data regarding the real-world (RW) use of tofacitinib (TOF) in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) are limited. We aimed to investigate TOF's RW efficacy and safety in Italian UC patients. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A retrospective assessment of clinical and endoscopic activity was performed according to the Mayo score. The primary endpoints were to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of TOF. RESULTS: We enrolled 166 patients with a median follow-up of 24 (IQR 8-36) weeks. Clinical remission was achieved in 61/166 (36.7%) and 75/166 (45.2%) patients at 8-week and 24-week follow-ups, respectively. The optimization was requested in 27 (16.3%) patients. Clinical remission was achieved more frequently when TOF was used as a first/second line rather than a third/fourth line treatment (p = 0.007). Mucosal healing was reported in 46% of patients at the median follow-up time. Colectomy occurred in 8 (4.8%) patients. Adverse events occurred in 12 (5.4%) patients and severe in 3 (1.8%). One case of simple Herpes Zoster and one of renal vein thrombosis were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: Our RW data confirm that TOF is effective and safe in UC patients. It performs remarkably better when used as the first/second line of treatment.


Subject(s)
Colitis, Ulcerative , Humans , Colitis, Ulcerative/drug therapy , Retrospective Studies , Treatment Outcome , Piperidines/adverse effects
4.
Int J Colorectal Dis ; 38(1): 120, 2023 May 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37160495

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Videocapsule endoscopy (VCE) is considered the gold standard for overt and obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB), after negative upper and lower endoscopy. Nonetheless, VCE's diagnostic yield is suboptimal, and it represents a costly, time-consuming, and often not easily available technique. In order to evaluate bleeding risk in patients with atrial fibrillation, several scoring systems have been proposed, but their utilization outside the original clinical setting has rarely been explored. The aim of the study is to evaluate potential role of bleeding risk scoring systems in predicting the occurrence of positive findings at VCE examination, and therefore in increasing VCE diagnostic yield. METHODS: Data from consecutive patients undergoing VCE between April 2015 and June 2020 were retrospectively retrieved, and clinical and demographic characteristics were collected. HAS-BLED, ATRIA, and ORBIT scores were calculated, and patients were considered at low or high risk of bleeding accordingly. Discriminative ability of the scores for positive VCE findings has been evaluated by area under receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC) calculation. Diagnostic yield of scores in high- and low-risk patients was calculated. RESULTS: A total of 413 patients underwent VCE examination, among which 368 (89%) for OGIB. Positive findings were observed in 246 patients (67%), with angiodysplasias being the most frequent lesion (92%). The three scores displayed similar consistent discriminative ability for positive VCE findings (mean AUC = 0.69), and identified high-risk group of patients in which VCE has a higher diagnostic yield. CONCLUSIONS: In the present retrospective study, bleeding scores accurately discriminated patients with higher probability of positive findings at VCE examination. Bleeding scores utilization may help in the management of patients with OGIB, with a potential consistent resource optimization and cost-saving.


Subject(s)
Atrial Fibrillation , Capsule Endoscopy , Humans , Atrial Fibrillation/complications , Atrial Fibrillation/diagnosis , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/diagnosis , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology
5.
Expert Opin Biol Ther ; 23(3): 293-304, 2023 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36843568

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Vedolizumab (VDZ) can be used to treat refractory ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD). We assessed whether there are differences in treating UC vs CD with VDZ. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Mayo score in UC and the Harvey-Bradshaw Index (HBI) in CD scored the clinical activity. Achievement and maintenance of clinical remission during the follow-up, and safety were the primary endpoints. RESULTS: 729 patients (475 with UC and 254 with CD), median follow-up of 18 (IQR 6-36) months, were enrolled. Clinical remission at the 6th month of treatment was achieved in 488 (66.9%) patients (74.4% in CD vs 62.9% in UC, p<0.002) while, during the follow-up, no difference was found (81.5% in the UC group and 81.5% pts in the CD group; p=0.537). The clinical remission at the 6th month of treatment (p=0.001) and being naïve to biologics (p<0.0001) were significantly associated with prolonged clinical remission. The clinical response was significantly higher in UC (90.1%) vs CD (84.3%) (p=0.023), and surgery occurred more frequently in CD (1.9% in UC vs 5.1% in CD, p=0.016). CONCLUSION: We found differences when using VDZ in UC vs CD in real life. These parameters can help the physician predict this drug's longterm efficacy.


Subject(s)
Colitis, Ulcerative , Crohn Disease , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases , Humans , Crohn Disease/drug therapy , Colitis, Ulcerative/drug therapy , C-Reactive Protein/analysis , Remission Induction , Italy , Gastrointestinal Agents/therapeutic use , Treatment Outcome , Retrospective Studies , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases/drug therapy
6.
Inflamm Bowel Dis ; 29(3): 376-383, 2023 03 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35579320

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars have entered the therapeutic armamentarium of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), allowing for the treatment of a greater number of patients for their reduced cost than the originator. However, comparative data on the efficacy and safety of the various ADA biosimilars remains scarce.We compare the efficacy and safety of ADA biosimilars SB5, ABP501, GP2017, and MSB11022 in treating IBD outpatients in a real-life Italian setting. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on consecutive IBD outpatients with complete clinical, laboratory, and endoscopic data. Clinical activity was measured using the Mayo score in ulcerative colitis (UC) and the Harvey-Bradshaw Index in Crohn's disease (CD). The primary endpoints were the following: (1) induction of remission in patients new to biologics and patients new to ADA but previously exposed to other anti-tumor necrosis factor agents or other biologics; (2) maintenance of remission in patients switched from the ADA originator to an ADA biosimilar; and (3) safety of various biosimilars. RESULTS: A total of 533 patients were enrolled according to the inclusion criteria: 162 patients with UC and 371 patients with CD. Clinical remission was obtained in 79.6% of patients new to biologics and 59.2% of patients new to ADA but not to other biologics; clinical remission was maintained in 81.0% of patients switched from the originator, and adverse events were recorded in 6.7% of patients. There was no significant difference between the 4 ADA biosimilars for each predetermined endpoint. CONCLUSIONS: Adalimumab biosimilars are effective and safe in IBD treatment, both in new patients and in patients switched from the ADA originator. No difference in efficacy and safety was found between ADA biosimilars.


We treated 533 IBD patients with adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars SB5, APB501, GP2017, and MSB11022. No differences between these 4 ADA biosimilars were found for reaching remission in naive patients, maintaining remission for nonmedical switching, clinical response, steroid-free remission, surgery rate, mucosal healing, or safety.


Subject(s)
Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals , Colitis, Ulcerative , Crohn Disease , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases , Humans , Adalimumab/therapeutic use , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/therapeutic use , Retrospective Studies , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases/drug therapy , Colitis, Ulcerative/drug therapy , Crohn Disease/drug therapy , Treatment Outcome
8.
J Gastrointestin Liver Dis ; 31(4): 411-416, 2022 12 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36535057

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars have been included into the therapeutic armamentarium of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD); however, comparative data on the efficacy and safety of the different ADA biosimilars after replacing the ADA originator for a non-medical reason remains scarce. We aimed to compare in a real-life setting the efficacy and safety of four ADA biosimilars SB5, APB501, GP2017, and MSB11022 in IBD patients after replacing the originator for a non-medical reason. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective study was performed on consecutive IBD patients, analyzing clinical, laboratory, and endoscopic data. The primary endpoints of the study were maintenance of clinical remission and safety of the different biosimilars. RESULTS: 153 patients were enrolled, 26 with UC and 127 with CD. Clinical remission was maintained in 124 out of 153 (81%) patients after a median (IQR) follow-up of 12 (6-24) months, without any significant difference between the four ADA biosimilars. ADA biosimilars dosage was optimized in five patients (3.3%). Loss of remission was significantly higher in UC patients (10/26 patients, 38.5%) than in CD patients (19/127 patients, 14.9%, p<0.025). Adverse events occurred in 12 (7.9%) patients; the large majority were mild. CONCLUSIONS: No difference in efficacy and safety was found between ADA biosimilars when used to replace the ADA originator for a non-medical reason. However, in UC patients the replacement of ADA originator for this reason should be carefully assessed.


Subject(s)
Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases , Humans , Adalimumab , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases/drug therapy , Italy , Treatment Outcome , Infliximab/therapeutic use
9.
Biomedicines ; 10(8)2022 Jul 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35892698

ABSTRACT

The approval of adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has reduced the cost of treatment. While several ADA biosimilars are currently available, comparative data on the ADA biosimilar GP2017 (HyrimozTM) and its originator (HumiraTM) in IBD are lacking. We compared the efficacy and safety of GP2017 versus originator in IBD outpatients in an Italian real-life setting. This retrospective analysis enrolled consecutive IBD patients with complete clinical, laboratory, and endoscopic data. Clinical activity was assessed with the Mayo score in ulcerative colitis (UC) and the Harvey-Bradshaw Index in Crohn's disease (CD). The primary endpoints were the induction of remission and the safety of GP2017 versus ADA originator. One hundred and thirty-four patients (30.6% with UC and 69.4% with CD, median age 38 years) were enrolled: 62 (46.3%) patients were treated with GP2017, and 72 (53.7%) with ADA originator; 118 (88.1%) patients were naïve to ADA. Clinical remission was obtained in 105 (78.4%) patients, during a median follow-up of 12 months, 82.3% and 75% in the GP2017 and ADA originator groups, respectively (p = 0.311). Treatment was well tolerated in both groups. This analysis of real-world data suggests that GP2017 and its originator are equivalent in terms of efficacy and safety in patients with IBD.

10.
Expert Opin Biol Ther ; 22(2): 313-320, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34904510

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: To compare the performances of Infliximab (IFX) biosimilar CT-P13 and SB2 in the treatment of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (IBD) outpatients in Italy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Three hundred and eighty IBD outpatients were retrospectively evaluated. The primary endpoint was to compare the two IFX biosimilars in terms of reaching and maintenance of remission at any timepoint. RESULTS: 197 patients with Ulcerative Colitis (UC) and 183 patients with Crohn's Disease (CD) treated with CT-P13 or SB2 and having a median (IQR) follow-up of 12 (6-36) months were compared: 230 (60.5%) were naïve to anti-TNFα, 20 (5.26%) were switched from IFX originator or from IFX CT-P13 to IFX SB2. Clinical remission was achieved in 133 (67.5%) UC patients and in 164 (89.6%) CD patients (p < 0.000), with no differences between CT-P13 and SB2 in the rate of remission in UC (p = 0.667) and CD (p = 0.286). Clinical response, steroid-free remission, rate of surgery, mucosal healing (MH) in UC, switching from IFX originator or from other biosimilar, and safety were similar. Higher MH rate was obtained in CD patients treated with CT-P13 (p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: This first comparative study found that both IFX biosimilars CT-P13 and SB2 are effective and safe in managing IBD outpatients.


Subject(s)
Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals , Colitis, Ulcerative , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases , Antibodies, Monoclonal , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/adverse effects , Colitis, Ulcerative/drug therapy , Gastrointestinal Agents/adverse effects , Humans , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases/drug therapy , Infliximab/therapeutic use , Italy , Prospective Studies , Retrospective Studies , Treatment Outcome
11.
Front Pharmacol ; 12: 747856, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34899302

ABSTRACT

Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) are chronic conditions of unknown etiology and immunomediated pathogenesis. In the last years, the comprehension of the complex mechanisms involved in the intestinal mucosal homeostasis, and the analysis of the alterations potentially leading to inflammatory pathologic states, has consistently increased. Specifically, the extraordinary impulse in the field of research of the intestinal microbiome has opened the door to the investigation of possible novel approaches to the diagnosis, management and therapeutic applications in IBD. In line with that, administration of probiotic bacteria has been intensely evaluated, leading to much more exciting results in experimental models than in clinical practice. Considering the consistent heterogeneity of the available studies on probiotics, the increased knowledge of the properties of the single bacterial species would ideally lead to unravel potential mechanisms of action that may bring therapeutic applications in specific pathologic condition. Among the relevant molecular pathways for mucosal homeostasis maintenance, the vitamin D/vitamin D receptor (VDR) pathway has been intensely studied in the very last years. In fact, besides osteometabolic functions, the vitamin D exerts important homeostatic effects in the organism at multiple levels, such as immunomodulation, inflammation control, and microbiota regulation, which are likely to play a relevant role in intestinal mucosa protection. In the present review, recent findings about probiotic applications in IBD and mechanisms of action linking vitamin D/VDR pathway to IBD are reported. Available evidence for probiotic effect on vitamin D/VDR are reviewed and potential future application in IBD patients are discussed. At present, many aspects of IBD pathogenesis are still obscure, and current therapeutic options for IBD treatment are at best suboptimal. The increasing comprehension of the different pathways involved in IBD pathogenesis will lead to novel findings ideally leading to potential clinical applications. Microbiota manipulation and vitamin/VDR pathway appear a promising field for future research and therapeutic developments.

12.
Int J Mol Sci ; 22(19)2021 Sep 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34638616

ABSTRACT

Crohn's disease (CD) is a chronic disorder characterized by full thickness patchy inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract. The pathogenesis is multifactorial and involves defective innate immune responses, microbiome alterations, and dysregulated activation of the acquired component of mucosal immunity. One of the molecular mediators that is involved at different levels in the initiation and progression of intestinal inflammation characteristic of CD is tumor necrosis factor (TNF). The present manuscript provides a comprehensive review focused on the potential role of TNF in the different phases of CD pathogenesis, particularly in light of its potential clinical implications. Currently available drugs blocking TNF are evaluated and discussed, specifically for open issues that still remain utilizing such therapy. TNF exerts a paramount role in the established phase of intestinal inflammation that characterizes CD patients, and anti-TNF biologics have definitely changed patient management, offering effective and safe options of treatment. Nonetheless, many patients still do not respond to anti-TNF therapy or experience unwanted side-effects. This could partially be due to the role that TNF plays in intestinal homeostasis that is particularly important during the early phase of the inflammatory process. In fact, emerging evidence supporting the dichotomous role of TNF and the identification of molecular markers will guide a more tailored and refined therapy for CD patients in the near future.


Subject(s)
Crohn Disease/immunology , Crohn Disease/therapy , Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha/antagonists & inhibitors , Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha/immunology , Adalimumab/therapeutic use , Anti-Inflammatory Agents/therapeutic use , Certolizumab Pegol/therapeutic use , Crohn Disease/etiology , Humans , Immunosuppressive Agents/therapeutic use , Infliximab/therapeutic use , Molecular Targeted Therapy/methods
13.
Int J Mol Sci ; 22(5)2021 Feb 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33671090

ABSTRACT

In the last decades, the comprehension of the pathophysiology of bone metabolism and its interconnections with multiple homeostatic processes has been consistently expanded. The branch of osteoimmunology specifically investigating the link between bone and immune system has been developed. Among molecular mediators potentially relevant in this field, vitamin D has been recently pointed out, and abnormalities of the vitamin D axis have been described in both in vitro and in vivo models of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) and arthritis. Furthermore, vitamin D deficiency has been reported in patients affected by IBD and chronic inflammatory arthritis, thus suggesting the intriguing possibility of impacting the disease activity by the administration vitamin D supplements. In the present review, the complex interwoven link between vitamin D signaling, gut barrier integrity, microbiota composition, and the immune system was examined. Potential clinical application exploiting vitamin D pathway in the context of IBD and arthritis is presented and critically discussed. A more detailed comprehension of the vitamin D effects and interactions at molecular level would allow one to achieve a novel therapeutic approach in gastro-rheumatologic inflammatory diseases through the design of specific trials and the optimization of treatment protocols.


Subject(s)
Arthritis, Rheumatoid/drug therapy , Gastrointestinal Diseases/drug therapy , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases/drug therapy , Vitamin D Deficiency/complications , Vitamin D/administration & dosage , Vitamins/administration & dosage , Animals , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/etiology , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/pathology , Gastrointestinal Diseases/etiology , Gastrointestinal Diseases/pathology , Humans , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases/etiology , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases/pathology , Vitamin D Deficiency/immunology
14.
Curr Rev Clin Exp Pharmacol ; 16(3): 210-218, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32664843

ABSTRACT

Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (IBDs) are chronic conditions characterized by unknown etiology and pathogenesis with deregulation of mucosal immunity. Among possible treatments, corticosteroids, already available from the '50s, are still the mainstay of treatment for moderate to severe disease. Nonetheless, the use of steroids is still largely empirical and solid evidence about therapeutic schemes are lacking. Moreover, due to the important side-effects and for the unsatisfactory impact on the long-term natural history of the disease, the steroid-sparing has become an important therapeutic goal in IBD management. Besides conventional steroids, the so-called "low bioavailability" steroids, which are steroids with high affinity for peripheral receptors and elevated hepatic first-pass metabolism, have demonstrated efficacy and a more favorable safety profile. In the present review of the literature evidence of efficacy and safety of conventional and low bioavailability steroids in IBD patients are evaluated, and practical suggestions for a correct use in clinical practice are presented according to the current clinical guidelines.


Subject(s)
Colitis , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases , Physicians , Adrenal Cortex Hormones/adverse effects , Chronic Disease , Humans , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases/drug therapy
15.
Nutrients ; 12(6)2020 Jun 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32521760

ABSTRACT

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (Sars-CoV-2) global pandemic is a devastating event that is causing thousands of victims every day around the world. One of the main reasons of the great impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on society is its unexpected spread, which has not allowed an adequate preparation. The scientific community is fighting against time for the production of a vaccine, but it is difficult to place a safe and effective product on the market as fast as the virus is spreading. Similarly, for drugs that can directly interfere with viral pathways, their production times are long, despite the great efforts made. For these reasons, we analyzed the possible role of non-pharmacological substances such as supplements, probiotics, and nutraceuticals in reducing the risk of Sars-CoV-2 infection or mitigating the symptoms of COVID-19. These substances could have numerous advantages in the current circumstances, are generally easily available, and have negligible side effects if administered at the already used and tested dosages. Large scientific evidence supports the benefits that some bacterial and molecular products may exert on the immune response to respiratory viruses. These could also have a regulatory role in systemic inflammation or endothelial damage, which are two crucial aspects of COVID-19. However, there are no specific data available, and rigorous clinical trials should be conducted to confirm the putative benefits of diet supplementation, probiotics, and nutraceuticals in the current pandemic.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/diet therapy , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Diet , Dietary Supplements , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/diet therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Probiotics/therapeutic use , Ascorbic Acid/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Vitamin D/therapeutic use
19.
Front Pharmacol ; 10: 671, 2019.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31316377

ABSTRACT

Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) are chronic conditions of the gastrointestinal tract in which dysregulated immune responses cause persistent inflammation of the gut mucosa. Biologic therapy with anti-TNF blockers has revolutionized the therapeutic management of IBD for their remarkable efficacy and potential impact on disease course and for many years has represented the sole treatment option for patients refractory or intolerant to conventional therapy. In recent years, more molecules, both biologically and chemically synthetized, have been developed as potential therapeutic options for IBD that target different molecular pathways aside from TNF blockade, and which have been proposed as targets for novel drugs. This is particularly relevant for the present, as well as future, management of IBD, considering that some patients are refractory to anti-TNF. This review will summarize the pharmacological options, either currently available or in the pipeline, for market approval to treat IBD, besides anti-TNF strategies, based on their mechanism(s) of action. We will also analyze the current evidence for effectiveness and safety, as well as offer perspective, regarding the potential implementation for such therapies in the future.

20.
World J Gastroenterol ; 24(41): 4652-4662, 2018 Nov 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30416313

ABSTRACT

AIM: To investigate the adhesion and anti-inflammatory effects of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG (LGG) in the colonic mucosa of healthy and ulcerative colitis (UC) patients, both in vivo and ex vivo in an organ culture model. METHODS: For the ex vivo experiment, a total of 98 patients (68 UC patients and 30 normal subjects) were included. Endoscopic biopsies were collected and incubated with and without LGG or LGG-conditioned media to evaluate the mucosal adhesion and anti-inflammatory effects [reduction of tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα) and interleukin (IL)-17 expression] of the bacteria, and extraction of DNA and RNA for quantification by real-time (RT)-PCR occurred after the incubation. A dose-response study was performed by incubating biopsies at "regular", double and 5 times higher doses of LGG. For the in vivo experiment, a total of 42 patients (20 UC patients and 22 normal controls) were included. Biopsies were taken from the colons of normal subjects who consumed a commercial formulation of LGG for 7 d prior to the colonoscopy, and the adhesion of the bacteria to the colonic mucosa was evaluated by RT-PCR and compared with that of control biopsies from patients who did not consume the formulation. LGG adhesion and TNFα and IL-17 expression were compared between UC patients who consumed a regular or double dose of LGG supplementation prior to colonoscopy. RESULTS: In the ex vivo experiment, LGG showed consistent adhesion to the distal and proximal colon in normal subjects and UC patients, with a trend towards higher concentrations in the distal colon, and in UC patients, adhesion was similar in biopsies with active and quiescent inflammation. In addition, bioptic samples from UC patients incubated with LGG conditioned media (CM) showed reduced expression of TNFα and IL-17 compared with the corresponding expression in controls (P < 0.05). Incubation with a double dose of LGG increased mucosal adhesion and the anti-inflammatory effects (P < 0.05). In the in vivo experiment, LGG was detectable only in the colon of patients who consumed the LGG formulation, and bowel cleansing did not affect LGG adhesion. UC patients who consumed the double LGG dose had increased mucosal concentrations of the bacteria and reduced TNFα and IL-17 expression compared with patients who consumed the regular dose (48% and 40% reduction, respectively, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In an ex vivo organ culture model, LGG showed consistent adhesion and anti-inflammatory effects. Colonization by LGG after consumption for a week was demonstrated in vivo in the human colon. Increasing the administered dose increased the adhesion and effectiveness of the bacteria. For the first time, we demonstrated that LGG effectively adheres to the colonic mucosa and exerts anti-inflammatory effects, both ex vivo and in vivo.


Subject(s)
Colitis, Ulcerative/diet therapy , Gastrointestinal Microbiome/genetics , Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus , Probiotics/administration & dosage , Adhesiveness , Biopsy , Colitis, Ulcerative/microbiology , Colitis, Ulcerative/pathology , Colon/microbiology , Colon/pathology , Colonoscopy , Cytokines/metabolism , DNA, Bacterial/isolation & purification , Feasibility Studies , Humans , Intestinal Mucosa/microbiology , Intestinal Mucosa/pathology , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...