Leucopenia resulting from a drug interaction between azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine and mesalamine, sulphasalazine, or balsalazide.
(9/215)
AIM: We evaluated the effect of coadministration of sulphasalazine, mesalamine, and balsalazide on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of azathioprine and 6-mercaptopurine. METHODS: Thirty four patients with Crohn's disease receiving azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine were enrolled in an eight week non-randomised parallel group drug interaction study and treated with mesalamine 4 g/day, sulphasalazine 4 g/day, or balsalazide 6.75 g/day. The primary outcome measure was the occurrence of clinically important leucopenia during the study, defined separately as total leucocyte counts < 3.0 x 10(9)/l and < or = 3.5 x 10(9)/l. Whole blood 6-thioguanine nucleotide concentrations were determined. RESULTS: Three patients could not be evaluated for the primary outcome measure. In the remaining 31 patients, the frequency of total leucocyte counts < 3.0 and < or = 3.5 were: 1/10 and 5/10 in the mesalamine group; 1/11 and 6/11 in the sulphasalazine group; and 0/10 and 2/10 in the balsalazide group. There were significant increases in mean whole blood 6-thioguanine nucleotide concentrations from baseline at most time points in the mesalamine and sulphasalazine groups but not in the balsalazide group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with Crohn's disease receiving azathioprine or 6-mercaptopurine, coadministration of mesalamine, sulphasalazine, and possibly balsalazide results in an increase in whole blood 6-thioguanine nucleotide concentrations and a high frequency of leucopenia. (+info)
Low dose balsalazide (1.5 g twice daily) and mesalazine (0.5 g three times daily) maintained remission of ulcerative colitis but high dose balsalazide (3.0 g twice daily) was superior in preventing relapses.
(10/215)
BACKGROUND: Balsalazide is a new 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) containing prodrug. Its efficacy in comparison with standard mesalazine therapy and the optimum dose for maintaining remission of ulcerative colitis are still unclear. AIMS: To compare the relapse preventing effect and safety profile of two doses of balsalazide and a standard dose of Eudragit coated mesalazine. METHODS: A total of 133 patients with ulcerative colitis in remission were recruited to participate in a double blind, multicentre, randomised trial: 49 patients received balsalazide 1.5 g twice daily, 40 received balsalazide 3.0 g twice daily, and 44 received mesalazine 0.5 g three times daily. Efficacy assessments were clinical activity index (CAI) and endoscopic score according to Rachmilewitz, and a histological score. In addition, laboratory tests were performed and urinary excretion of 5-ASA and its metabolite N-Ac-5-ASA was analysed. The study lasted for 26 weeks. RESULTS: Balsalazide 3.0 g twice daily resulted in a significantly higher clinical remission rate (77.5%) than balsalazide 1.5 g twice daily (43.8%) and mesalazine 0.5 g three times daily (56.8%) (p=0.006). The respective times to relapse were 161 days, 131 days (p=0.003), and 144 days (NS). Accordingly, pairwise contrasts of the final endoscopic score demonstrated a significant difference (p=0.005) between the two balsalazide treatment groups while differences between either of these two groups and mesalazine were not statistically significant. Patients treated with balsalazide excreted less 5-ASA and N-Ac-5-ASA than patients receiving mesalazine but these differences were not statistically significant. Discontinuation of the trial because of adverse effects occurred in nine patients: three in the balsalazide 1.5 g twice daily group, two in the balsalazide 3.0 g twice daily group, and four in the mesalazine 0.5 g three times daily group. No clinically important new drug safety related findings were identified in this study. CONCLUSIONS: High dose balsalazide (3.0 g twice daily) was superior in maintaining remission in patients with ulcerative colitis compared with a low dose (1.5 g twice daily) or a standard dose of mesalazine (0.5 g three times daily). All three treatments were safe and well tolerated. (+info)
A double-blind comparison of balsalazide, 6.75 g daily, and sulfasalazine, 3 g daily, in patients with newly diagnosed or relapsed active ulcerative colitis.
(11/215)
BACKGROUND: Sulfasalazine is well established in the treatment of active ulcerative colitis. Intolerance to sulfasalazine, however, is a common problem. Balsalazide has been designed to deliver 5-aminosalicylic acid to the colon without the poor tolerability of sulfasalazine. AIM: To compare the safety and efficacy of balsalazide, 6.75 g daily, with sulfasalazine, 3 g daily, in the treatment of active ulcerative colitis of all grades of severity. METHODS: Balsalazide and sulfasalazine were compared in a multicentre, double-blind, parallel group study over 12 weeks. Patients were stratified for disease severity and topical and/or oral steroids were co-administered where clinically necessary. RESULTS: Fifty-seven patients were randomized: 28 to receive balsalazide and 29 to receive sulfasalazine. Significantly fewer patients withdrew from the balsalazide group due to adverse events (2/28 vs. 9/29, P=0.041). These data confirm that balsalazide is better tolerated than sulfasalazine. In patients able to tolerate the treatment, similar improvements were recorded in clinical, sigmoidoscopic and histological assessments in both treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the better tolerability of balsalazide compared to sulfasalazine, and supports the use of balsalazide in ulcerative colitis of all grades of severity. (+info)
A double-blind comparison of balsalazide, 6.75 g, and sulfasalazine, 3 g, as sole therapy in the management of ulcerative colitis.
(12/215)
BACKGROUND: Sulfasalazine is accepted therapy for active ulcerative colitis, but side-effects and intolerance are common. Balsalazide is an azo-bonded pro-drug which also releases 5-aminosalicylic acid into the colon, but uses an inert carrier molecule. AIM: To compare the safety and efficacy of sul- fasalazine, 3 g, with balsalazide, 6.75 g, in the initial daily treatment of mild to moderate ulcerative colitis. METHODS: A randomized, multicentre, double-blind, parallel group study was performed, with a treatment duration of 8 weeks. Patients on previous maintenance treatment were excluded. The trial medication was the sole treatment for the colitis. Efficacy was assessed by patient diaries, symptom assessment, sigmoidoscopic appearance and histology. RESULTS: Fifty patients were recruited: 26 allocated to the balsalazide group and 24 to the sulfasalazine group. More patients withdrew due to adverse events in the sulfasalazine group (nine patients vs. one patient in the balsalazide group, P=0.004). Improvement occurred in both groups, with a tendency to a faster response with balsalazide. Of the patients taking balsalazide, 61% achieved clinical and sigmoidoscopic remission. CONCLUSIONS: Balsalazide, 6.75 g, is effective as the sole treatment for patients with mild to moderately active ulcerative colitis, with significantly fewer withdrawals due to side-effects than in a similar group of patients taking sulfasalazine, 3 g. (+info)
Evaluation of renal function following treatment with 5-aminosalicylic acid derivatives in patients with ulcerative colitis.
(13/215)
BACKGROUND: A number of cases of nephrotoxicity have been reported in patients with inflammatory bowel disease taking oral 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA). AIM: To evaluate the effects of 9 months of therapy with mesalazine or olsalazine on renal function in patients with ulcerative colitis in remission. METHODS: Forty patients with ulcerative colitis in complete remission for 6 months were randomized to either olsalazine (n=20) or mesalazine (n=20 for nine months). Thirty-six of the 40 patients were on prior salicylate therapy. Disease activity was the measure ofclinical efficacy and was assessed by the Harvey-Bradshaw Index (HBI). Laboratory efficacy measurements included glomerular filtration rate (GFR), microalbuminuria, urinary gluthathione S-transferase (GST) and serum C-reactive protein (CRP). Safety analysis consisted of documentation of adverse events and laboratory values. RESULTS: There was no significant reduction in the GFR overall on therapy. The levels of GFR adjusted for baseline were similar in the two treatment groups after 3, 6 and 9 months. A significantly higher percentage of mesalazine-treated patients experienced drug related adverse events, all of a minor nature. The incidence of adverse events causing early withdrawal was similar in the two treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Treatment with mesalazine or olsalazine for 9 months had no significant impact on GFR. (+info)
Review article: monitoring for drug side-effects in inflammatory bowel disease.
(14/215)
The side-effects suitable for monitoring in patients with inflammatory bowel disease being treated with the four main groups of drugs (5-aminosalicylic acid preparations, azathioprine and 6-mercaptopurine, methotrexate, and corticosteroids) are reviewed. On the basis of the reported frequency, severity and timing of side-effects, a practical scheme of monitoring is recommended. This includes a baseline measurement of full blood count, creatinine and liver function tests in all patients. In the absence of worrying symptoms, we recommend the following: (i) no monitoring for sulfasalazine; (ii) for other 5-aminosalicylic acid preparations, the measurement of creatinine at 6 and 12 months and then annually; (iii) for azathioprine/6-mercaptopurine, thiopurine methyltransferase genotype/phenotype determination has no role in treatment monitoring, but a full blood count at 2 weeks, 1 month, 3 months and then every 3 months should be performed; (iv) for methotrexate, a full blood count and liver function tests should be performed every 3 months; (v) for steroids, dual energy X-ray absorptiometry bone scanning should be performed at the start of therapy, every year in which steroids are used if the T score is < 0, and every 3-5 years if the T score is > 0. (+info)
Long-term aminosalicylate therapy is under-used in patients with ulcerative colitis: a cross-sectional survey.
(15/215)
BACKGROUND: There is evidence from case-control studies that aminosalicylate drugs can reduce colorectal cancer risk by 75-81% in patients with ulcerative colitis. Patients may fail to comply with long-term therapies, however, or may have been advised to discontinue treatment once in remission. AIM: To describe the usage of long-term aminosalicylate therapy in patients with ulcerative colitis. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed using data extracted from general practitioner clinical records on demographic features, extent and duration of disease, use of aminosalicylate therapy and specialist care. RESULTS: Three hundred and sixty-three people had ulcerative colitis and no history of colorectal surgery. Ninety-five of 175 (54%) patients with proctitis, 78 of 123 (63%) patients with left-sided colitis and 28 of 45 (62%) patients with extensive colitis were currently taking an aminosalicylate drug. Those doing so were more likely to be under specialist care than to be definitely or possibly discharged (odds ratio, 4.9; 95% confidence interval, 2.9-8.4). The likelihood of current aminosalicylate therapy was not related to gender or the extent of disease, but was negatively related to the duration of disease. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial minority of patients with ulcerative colitis does not take long-term aminosalicylate therapy. Those who do are more likely to be under specialist care, to be older or to have disease of shorter duration. (+info)
A radioimmunoassay for isoniazid.
(16/215)
A sensitive radioimmunoassay is described, for measuring isoniazid in therapeutic and subtherapeutic concentrations. This radioimmunoassay was used in an exploratory clinical study to measure, as a function of time, the concentration of this drug in plasma of patients receiving isoniazid therapy. (+info)