An Oral Preparation of Mesalamine as Long-Term Maintenance Therapy for Ulcerative Colitis

A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial

  1. Stephen B. Hanauer, MD;
  2. Charles A. Sninsky, MD;
  3. Malcom Robinson, MD;
  4. Bernard J. Powers, MD;
  5. James D. McHattie, MD;
  6. James E Mayle, MD;
  7. Charles O. Elson, MD;
  8. Michael P. DeMicco, MD;
  9. James H. Butt, MD;
  10. Ronald E. Pruitt, MD;
  11. John M. Bozdech, MD; and
  12. Michael A. Safdi, MD
  1. The Mesalamine Study Group* Acknowledgments: The authors thank Mary G. Royer for assistance in preparing the manuscript. Grant Support: In part by a clinical grant from Procter & Gamble Pharmaceuticals, Cincinnati, Ohio. Requests for Reprints: Stephen B. Hanauer, MD, Division of Gastroenterology, University of Chicago Hospital, 5841 South Maryland Avenue, Box 400, Chicago, IL 60637. Current Author Addresses: Dr. Hanauer: Division of Gastroenterology, University of Chicago Hospital, 5841 South Maryland Avenue, Box 400, Chicago, IL 60637.

    Abstract

    Objective: To compare the safety and efficacy of a pH-sensitive, polymer-coated oral formulation of mesalamine (Asacol, Procter & Gamble Pharmaceuticals, Cincinnati, Ohio) with those of placebo in maintaining remission in patients with ulcerative colitis.

    Design: Multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial.

    Setting: Eight private practices, five university-based medical centers, and four hospitals or clinics.

    Patients: 264 patients with ulcerative colitis that had been maintained in remission for at least 1 month while the patients were receiving stable doses of sulfasalazine or any oral mesalamine product.

    Intervention: Coated mesalamine at oral dosages of 0.8 g/d or 1.6 g/d or matching placebo for 6 months.

    Measurements: Treatment success, defined as maintenance of remission after 6 months, and treatment failure, defined as relapse during the study (as indicated by proctosigmoidoscopy at 1, 3, or 6 months of treatment) or withdrawal due to adverse events. Safety was assessed on the basis of laboratory analyses and patient- and investigator-noted adverse events.

    Results: 189 patients were compliant with the protocol for 6 months or stopped receiving therapy because of relapse or adverse events. Of these 189 patients, 25 of the 63 patients (39.7%) in the placebo group had treatment success compared with 40 of the 68 patients (58.8% [95% CI, 46.4% to 71.3%]) in the group receiving mesalamine, 0.8 g/d (P = 0.036) and 38 of the 58 patients (65.5% [CI, 52.4% to 78.6%]) in the group receiving mesalamine, 1.6 g/d (P = 0.006). In the intention-to-treat analysis of all patients, 42 of the 87 patients (48.3%) in the placebo group had treatment success compared with 57 of the 90 patients (63.3% [CI, 52.8% to 73.8%]) in the group receiving mesalamine, 0.8 g/d (P = 0.050) and 61 of the 87 patients (70.1% [CI, 59.9% to 80.3%]) in the group receiving mesalamine, 1.6 g/d (P = 0.005). Age, sex, and race were not found to predict treatment success or failure. The mesalamine tablet was well tolerated, and no clinically significant changes were seen in hematologic, hepatic, or renal laboratory profiles.

    Conclusion: Coated mesalamine at oral dosages of 0.8 g/d and 1.6 g/d is safe and effective in maintaining remission in patients with quiescent ulcerative colitis.

    *For a listing of members of The Mesalamine Study Group, see the Appendix.

    « Previous | Next Article »Table of Contents

    This Article

    1. Ann Intern Med January 15, 1996 vol. 124 no. 2 204-211
    1. » Abstract
    2. Figures
    3. Full Text
    4. Full Text (PDF)

    Rapid Responses

    1. Submit a response
    2. No responses published

    Current Issue

    1. November 17, 2009, 151 (10)
    1. Alert me to current issues