Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of our study was to compare the efficacy and safety of oral mesalazine with mesalazine suppositories in patients with active ulcerative proctitis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A four-week, randomized, single-blind trial was performed in 58 patients with active, histologically confirmed ulcerative proctitis (≤15 cm) to evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral 800-mg mesalazine tablets taken three times per day (n=29) compared with 400 mg of mesalazine suppositories administered three times per day (n=29). Patients were evaluated at study entry and after two and four weeks. Efficacy evaluations included a disease activity index, which represents a score with four variables: stools frequency, rectal bleeding, mucosal appearance, and physician's assessment of disease severity. Histologic activity was also assessed at study entry and after two and four weeks in accordance with the criteria by Truelove and Richard. Safety assessment included clinical laboratory parameters and adverse event reports. RESULTS: There were no significant differences with regard to baseline comparisons of demographics and severity between the two treatment groups. Improvement in mean disease activity index score was significantly greater with suppositories compared with oral mesalazine, both at two-week and four-week visits (mean disease activity index scores at baseline, two, and four weeks: suppositories = 7.7, 2.59, and 1.48; tablets = 7.42, 5.72, and 3.48, respectively (P<0.001)). The rate of histologic remission was significantly greater with suppositories compared with tablets both at two and four weeks (P<0.01). There were no significant differences in adverse events or clinical laboratory results between treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Results of this study indicate that treatment with mesalazine suppositories produces earlier and significantly better results than oral mesalazine in the treatment of active ulcerative proctitis.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Sutherland LR, Martin F, Greer S,et al. 5-Aminosalicylic acid enema in the treatment of distal ulcerative colitis, proctosigmoiditis and proctitis. Gastroenterology 1987;92:1894–8.
Campieri M, Gionchetti P, Belluzzi A,et al. Optimum dosage of 5-aminosalicylic acid as rectal enemas in patients with active ulcerative colitis. Gut 1991;32:929–31.
Van Hogezand RA, van Hees PA, van Gorp JP,et al. Double-blind comparison of 5-aminosalicylic and acetyl-5-aminosalicylic acid suppositories in patients with idiopathic proctitis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 1988;2:33–40.
Campieri M, Gionchetti P, Belluzzi A,et al. Topical treatment with 5-aminosalicylic acid in distal ulcerative colitis by using a new suppository preparation: a double blind placebo controlled trial. Int J Colorectal Dis 1990;5:79–81.
Vitti RA, Meyers F, Knight LC,et al. Quantitative distribution of radiolabeled 5-aminosalicylic acid enema in patients with left-sided ulcerative colitis. Dig Dis Sci 1989;34:1792–7.
Campieri M, Corbelli C, Gionchetti P,et al. Spread and distribution of 5-ASA colonic foam and 5-ASA enema in patients with ulcerative colitis. Dig Dis Sci 1992;37:1890–7.
Williams CN, Haber G, Aquino JA. Double blind, placebo-controlled evaluation of 5-ASA suppositories in active distal proctitis and measurement of extent of spread using 99 Tc-labeled 5-ASA suppositories. Dig Dis Sci 1987;32:71S-5S.
Campieri M, Gionchetti P, Belluzzi A,et al. 5-Aminosalicylic acid as enemas or suppositories in distal ulcerative colitis? J Clin Gastroenterol 1988;10:406–9.
Campieri M, De Franchis R, Bianchi Porro G,et al. Mesalazine(5-aminosalicylic acid) suppositories in the treatment of ulcerative proctitis or distal proctosigmoiditis: a randomized controlled trial. Scand J Gastroenterol 1990;25:663–8.
Kam L, Cohen H, Dooley C,et al. A comparison of mesalamine and oral sulfasalazine for treatment of active distal ulcerative colitis in adults. Am J Gastroenterol 1996;91:1338–42.
The Rowasa Study Group. A double-blind comparison of oralversus rectal mesalamineversus combination therapy in the treatment of distal ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology 1995;108:A909.
Truelove SC, Richard WC. Biopsy studies in ulcerative colitis. BMJ 1956;i:1315–7.
Sninsky C, Cort D, Shanahan F,et al. Oral mesalamine (Asacol) for mildly to moderately active ulcerative colitis: a multicenter study. Ann Intern Med 1990;115:350–5.
Schroeder KW, Tremaine WJ, Ilstrup DM. Coated oral 5-aminosalicylic acid in the treatment of active ulcerative colitis. N Engl Med 1987;317:1625–9.
Miglioli M, Bianchi-Porro G, Brunetti G,et al. Oraldelayed release mesalazine in the treatment of mild ulcerative colitis: a dose-ranging study. Eur J Gastroentol Hepatol 1990;2:229–34.
Rijk MCM, van Schaik A, van Tongeren JH. Disposition of 5-aminosalicylic acid by 5-aminosalicylic acid-delivering compounds. Scand J Gastroenterol 1988;23:107–12.
Christensen LA, Fallinborg J, Abildgaard K,et al. Topical and systemic availability of 5-aminosalicylate: a comparisons of three controlled release preparations in man. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 1990;4:523–33.
Gionchetti P, Campieri M, Venturi A,et al. Systemic availability of 5-aminosalicylic acid: comparison of delayed release and an azo-bond preparation. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 1996;10:601–5.
Jacobsen BA, Abildgaard K, Rasmussen HH,et al. Availability of mesalazine(5-aminosalicylic acid) from enemas and suppositories during steady-state conditions. Scand J Gastroenterol 1991;26:374–8.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
About this article
Cite this article
Gionchetti, P., Rizzello, F., Venturi, A. et al. Comparison of oral with rectal mesalazine in the treatment of ulcerative proctitis. Dis Colon Rectum 41, 93–97 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02236902
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02236902