Background Curcumin, an active ingredient of the Indian herb turmeric (Curcuma longa), has shown promising anti-inflammatory properties. Studies of its potential benefits in treating patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) are limited. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of human randomized placebo controlled trials to evaluate the efficacy of adjunctive therapy with curcumin in treating patients with UC. Methods We conducted a search of several databases (from January 2000 to September 2018). A randomeffects model was used for analysis. We assessed heterogeneity between study-specific estimates using the Cochran Q statistical test, 95% prediction interval (PI) and I 2 statistics. The outcomes assessed were the pooled odds of clinical response and remission as well as the endoscopic response. Results A total of 7 studies with 380 patients (curcumin n=188; placebo n=190) were included in the final analysis. The pooled odds ratio for clinical remission with curcumin use was 2.9 (95%CI 1.5-5.5, I 2 =45, P=0.002), clinical response was 2.6 (95%CI 1.5-4.5, I 2 =74%, P=0.001), and endoscopic response/remission was 2.3 (95%CI 1.2-4.6, I 2 =35.5%, P=0.01). Conclusions Based on our study, combined mesalamine and curcumin therapy was associated with roughly threefold better odds of a clinical response compared to placebo, with minimal side effects. This response was statistically significant, albeit with heterogeneity, probably due to the different severity scoring indices, curcumin dosages and routes of drug delivery used.
Background and aims: A high rate of neoplasia (high grade dysplasia; HGD and esophageal adenocarcinoma; EAC) has been reported in Barrett’s Esophagus at index endoscopy but precise rates of post endoscopy Barrett’s neoplasia (PEBN) are unknown.
Methods: Systematic review and meta-analysis was performed examining electronic databases (inception to October 2021) for studies reporting PEBN. Consistent with definitions of Post Colonoscopy Colorectal Cancer as proposed by the World Endoscopy Organization, we defined neoplasia(HGD/EAC) detected at index endoscopy and/or within 6 months of a negative index endoscopy as “prevalent” neoplasia; those detected after 6 months of a negative index endoscopy and prior to next surveillance interval(i.e. 3 years) as PEBN or “interval” neoplasia, and those detected after 36 months of a negative index endoscopy as “incident” neoplasia. Pooled incidence rates and proportion relative to total neoplasia were analyzed.
Results: 11 studies (n=59,795, age:62.3±3.3 years, 61%males) met inclusion criteria. The pooled incidence rates were: prevalent neoplasia 4.5% (95%confidence interval: 2.2-8.9) at baseline and additional 0.3%(0.1-0.7) within first 6 months, PEBN 0.52%(0.48-0.58) and incident neoplasia: 1.41%(0.93-2.14). At 3 years from index endoscopy, PEBN accounted for 3% while prevalent neoplasia accounted for 97% of total Barrett’s neoplasia.
Conclusion: Neoplasia detected at or within 6 months of index endoscopy account for most of the Barrett’s neoplasia(>90%). Post-Endoscopy Barrett’s Neoplasia account for ~3% of cases and can be used for validation in future. This highlights the importance of a high-quality index endoscopy in Barrett’s Esophagus and the need to establish quality benchmarks to measure endoscopists’ performance.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.