This guidance represents the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) current thinking on this topic. It does not create or confer any rights for or on any person and does not operate to bind FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if the approach satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations. If you want to discuss an alternative approach, contact the FDA staff responsible for implementing this guidance. If you cannot identify the appropriate FDA staff, call the appropriate number listed on the title page of this guidance.I.

No abstract

OBJECTIVES:Linaclotide is a minimally absorbed guanylate cyclase-C agonist. The objective of this trial was to determine the efficacy and safety of linaclotide in patients with irritable bowel syndrome with constipation (IBS-C).METHODS:This phase 3, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial randomized IBS-C patients to placebo or 290 μg oral linaclotide once daily in a 12-week treatment period, followed by a 4-week randomized withdrawal (RW) period. There were four primary end points, the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) primary end point for IBS-C (responder: improvement of ≥30% in average daily worst abdominal pain score and increase by ≥1 complete spontaneous bowel movement (CSBM) from baseline (same week) for at least 50% of weeks assessed) and three other primary end points, based on improvements in abdominal pain and CSBMs for 9/12 weeks. Adverse events (AEs) were monitored.RESULTS:The trial evaluated 800 patients (mean age=43.5 years, female=90.5%, white=76.9%). The FDA end point was met by 136/405 linaclotide-treated patients (33.6%), compared with 83/395 placebo-treated patients (21.0%) (P<0.0001) (number needed to treat: 8.0, 95% confidence interval: 5.4, 15.5). A greater percentage of linaclotide patients, compared with placebo patients, reported for at least 6/12 treatment period weeks, a reduction of ≥30% in abdominal pain (50.1 vs. 37.5%, P=0.0003) and an increase of ≥1 CSBM from baseline (48.6 vs. 29.6%, P<0.0001). A greater percentage of linaclotide patients vs. placebo patients were also responders for the other three primary end points (P<0.05). Significantly greater improvements were seen in linaclotide vs. placebo patients for all secondary end points (P<0.001). During the RW period, patients remaining on linaclotide showed sustained improvement; patients re-randomized from linaclotide to placebo showed return of symptoms, but without worsening of symptoms relative to baseline. Diarrhea, the most common AE, resulted in discontinuation of 5.7% of linaclotide and 0.3% of placebo patients.CONCLUSIONS:Linaclotide significantly improved abdominal pain and bowel symptoms associated with IBS-C for at least 12 weeks; there was no worsening of symptoms compared with baseline following cessation of linaclotide during the RW period.

In these two 12-week trials, linaclotide significantly reduced bowel and abdominal symptoms in patients with chronic constipation. Additional studies are needed to evaluate the potential long-term risks and benefits of linaclotide in chronic constipation. (Funded by Ironwood Pharmaceuticals and Forest Research Institute; ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00765882 and NCT00730015.).

Nonsteroidal antlinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), have cancer preventive and tumor regressive effects in the human colon. They lower the incidence of and mortality from colorectal cancer and sulindac reduces the number and size of polyps in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis.We studied the effect of sulindac, and its metabolite sulindac sulfide, on the proliferation of HT-29 colon adenocarcinoma cells. Both compounds reduced the proliferation rate of these cells, changed their morphology, and caused them to accumulate in the Go/Gj phase of the cell cycle. These responses were time-and concentration-dependent and reversible. In addition, these compounds reduced the level and activity of several cyclin-dependent kinases (cdks), which regulate cell cycle progression. Sulindac and sulindac sulfide also induced apoptosis in these cells at concentrations that affected their proliferation, morphology, and cell cycle phase distribution. Sulindac sulfide was approximately sixfold more potent than sulindac in inducing these cellular responses.Our results indicate that inhibition of cell cycle progression and induction of apoptotic cell death contribute to the anti-proliferative effects of sulindac and sulindac sulfide in HT-29 cells. These findings may be relevant to the cancer preventive and tumor regressive effects of these compounds in humans. (J. Clin. Invest. 1995. 96:491-503.)