AIMTo evaluate the real-world effectiveness of golimumab in ulcerative colitis (UC) and to identify predictors of response.METHODSWe conducted an observational, prospective and multi-center study in UC patients treated with golimumab, from September 2014 to September 2015. Clinical activity was assessed at week 0 and 14 with the physician’s global clinical assessment (PGA) and the partial Mayo score. Colonoscopies and blood tests were performed, following daily-practice clinical criteria, and the results were recorded in an SPSS database.RESULTSThirty-three consecutive patients with moderately to severely active UC were included. Among them, 54.5% were female and 42 years was the average age. Thirty percent had left-sided UC (E2) and 70% had extensive UC (E3). All patients had an endoscopic Mayo score of 2 or 3 at baseline. Twenty-seven point three percent were anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) treatment naïve, whereas 72.7% had previously received infliximab and/or adalimumab. Sixty-nine point seven percent showed clinical response and were steroid-free at week 14 (a decrease from baseline in the partial Mayo score of at least 3 points). Based on PGA, the clinical remission and clinical response rates were 24% and 55% respectively. Withdrawal of corticosteroids was observed in 70.8% of steroid-dependent patients at the end of the study. Three out of 10 clinical non-responders needed a colectomy. Mean fecal calprotectin value at baseline was 300 μg/g, and 170.5 μg/g at week 14. Being anti-TNF treatment naïve was a protection factor, which was related to better chances of reaching clinical remission. Twenty-seven point three percent of the patients required treatment intensification at 14 wk of follow-up. Only three adverse effects (AEs) were observed during the study; all were mild and golimumab was not interrupted.CONCLUSIONThis real-life practice study endorses golimumab’s promising results, demonstrating its short-term effectiveness and confirming it as a safe drug during the induction phase.
Mindfulness-based interventions have shown some efficacy in decreasing stress levels and improving quality of life. However, so far, only a few studies have studied this type of intervention among patients with inflammatory bowel disease and none of them have studied their effects on inflammatory biomarkers. This current study was a two-armed, single-centre, randomised (2:1 ratio) controlled trial used to evaluate the effects of a mindfulness-based intervention (n = 37) compared to standard medical therapy (n = 20) in patients with Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis. The mindfulness intervention blended four internet-based therapy modules with four face-to-face support sessions. The outcomes we assessed were faecal calprotectin (primary outcome), C-reactive protein, and cortisol levels measured in hair samples at several timepoints. The between-group analysis highlighted significant decreases in faecal calprotectin and in C-reactive protein levels in the mindfulness-based intervention group compared to the standard medical therapy group at the six-month follow-up (faecal calprotectin: −367, [95% CI: −705, −29], P = 0.03; C-reactive protein: −2.82, [95% CI: −5.70, 0.08], P = 0.05), with moderate to large effect sizes (faecal calprotectin: ηp 2 = 0.085; C-reactive protein: ηp 2 = 0.066). We concluded that mindfulness-based therapy administered as part of standard clinical practice effectively improves inflammatory biomarkers in patients diagnosed with inflammatory bowel disease.
The addition of metronidazole to azathioprine did not significantly reduce the risk of endoscopic recurrence beyond azathioprine alone in this study but does not worsen its safety profile.
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.