Why Vono
Vonoprazan, a novel class of Potassium Competitive Acid Blocker has been introduced in the space of Anti-peptic ulcerants post 3 long decades of PPI existence as the best alternative. This superior molecule promises to be the future with its key attributes of 24-hour pH > 4 holding time ratio, peak action with its first dose, and immediate symptomatic relief & no restriction of mealtime dosing for best patient outcomes. Dr. Reddys who has been at the forefront in Gastroenterology therapy are among the first few top Indian Pharma Companies to launch the patented molecule Vono ( Vonoprazan) along with a non-exclusive patent licensing agreement with manufacturers to commercialize Vono (Vonoprazan) in India.
Where to Use
•Treatment of reflux esophagitis (RE)
•Treatment of gastric ulcer (GU)
•Treatment of duodenal ulcer (DU)
•Prevention of reoccurrence of gastric ulcer or duodenal ulcer during low-dose aspirin administration
•Prevention of reoccurrence of gastric ulcer or duodenal ulcer during NSAIDs administration.
•Adjunct to Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication associated with: Gastric ulcer, duodenal ulcer, gastric MALT lymphoma, idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura, the stomach after endoscopic resection of early stage cancer or Helicobacter Pylori gastritis.
How to Use
•Reflux esophagitis (erosive esophagitis)
The usual dose is 20 mg of vonoprazan once a day. Administration should be limited to 4 weeks. However, when the effect is insufficient, treatment may be continued for up to 8 weeks.
•Gastric ulcer: The usual dose is 20 mg of vonoprazan once a day. Administration should be limited to 8 weeks.
•Duodenal ulcer: The usual dose is 20 mg of vonoprazan once a day. Administration should be limited to 6 weeks.
•Prevention of recurrence of gastric ulcer or duodenal ulcer during low-dose aspirin administration. The usual dose is 10 mg of vonoprazan once a day.
•Adjunct to Helicobacter pylori eradication: Usually, the following 3 drugs are orally administered at the same time twice daily for 7 days: 20 mg vonoprazan, 750 mg amoxicillin hydrate, and 200 mg clarithromycin. The dose of clarithromycin may be appropriately increased as required; however, the upper limit is 400 mg twice daily or physician judgement.
When Helicobacter pylori eradication treatment with 3 drugs consisting of a proton pump inhibitor, amoxicillin hydrate, and clarithromycin fails, alternative treatment with the following 3 drugs is recommended; 20 mg vonoprazan, 750 mg amoxicillin hydrate, and 250 mg metronidazole, orally administered at the same time twice daily for 7 days. The doses of antibiotic should follow the respective label recommendations for H. pylori eradication.
Special Patient Populations
Elderly Patients:
Since the physiological functions such as hepatic or renal function are decreased in elderly patients in general, vonoprazan should be carefully administered.
Paediatric Patients:
Vonoprazan has not been studied in patients under 18 years of age.
Impaired Renal Function:
a.Healing of Erosive Esophagitis:
The recommended dosage of Vonoprazan in adult patients with renal impairment is described in Table 1 below.
Safety Advice
Use in Special Populations (Such as Pregnant Women, Lactating Women, Paediatric Patients, Geriatric Patients, etc.)
Pregnancy
No clinical studies have been conducted to date to evaluate vonoprazan in subjects who are pregnant. In a rat toxicology study, embryo-foetal toxicity was observed following exposure of more than approximately 28 times of the exposure (AUC) at the maximum clinical dose (40 mg/day) of vonoprazan. As a precaution, vonoprazan should not be administered to women who are or may be pregnant, unless the expected therapeutic benefit is thought to outweigh any possible risk.
Lactation
No clinical studies have been conducted to date to evaluate vonoprazan in subjects who are lactating are lactating. It is unknown whether vonoprazan is excreted in human milk. In animal studies it has been shown that vonoprazan was excreted in milk. During treatment with vonoprazan, nursing should be avoided if the administration of this drug is necessary for the mother.
Pediatric use
The safety and effectiveness of vonoprazan is not established in pediatric patients.
Geriatric use
No overall differences in safety or effectiveness were observed between these patients and younger adult patients, and other reported clinical experience has not identified differences in responses between the geriatric and younger adult patients, but greater sensitivity of some older individuals cannot be ruled out.
No clinically meaningful differences in the pharmacokinetics of vonoprazan are predicted in patients 65 years of age and older compared to younger adult patients.
Renal Impairment
Healing of Erosive Esophagitis: No dosage adjustment of vonoprazan is recommended in patients with mild to moderate renal impairment (eGFR 30 to 89 mL/min). Dosage reduction is recommended in patients with severe renal impairment (eGFR < 30 mL/min). Maintenance of Healed Erosive Esophagitis: No dosage adjustment of vonoprazan is recommended in patients with any degree of renal impairment. Treatment of H. pylori Infection: Use of vonoprazan is not recommended for the treatment of H. pylori infection in patients with severe renal impairment (eGFR < 30 mL/min).
Hepatic Impairment
Healing of Erosive Esophagitis: No dosage adjustment of vonoprazan is recommended in patients with mild hepatic impairment (Child-Pugh A). Dosage reduction is recommended in patients with moderate to severe hepatic impairment (Child-Pugh Class B and C). Maintenance of Healed Erosive Esophagitis: No dosage adjustment of vonoprazan for the maintenance of healed erosive esophagitis is recommended in patients with any degree of hepatic impairment. Treatment of H. pylori Infection: Use of vonoprazan is not recommended in patients with moderate to severe hepatic impairment (Child-Pugh Class B and C).
Effects on ability to drive and use machines
The influence of vonoprazan on the ability to drive or use machines is unknown.
Side Effects
Contraindications
•Vonoprazan is contraindicated in patients with a known hypersensitivity to vonoprazan or any component of Vonoprazan. Reactions have included anaphylactic shock.
•Vonoprazan is contraindicated with rilpivirine-containing products.
•For information about contraindications of antibacterial agents (clarithromycin and amoxicillin) indicated in combination with Vonoprazan, refer to the Contraindications section of the corresponding prescribing information.
Special Warnings and Precautions for Use
Presence of Gastric Malignancy
In adults, symptomatic response to therapy with Vonoprazan does not preclude the presence of gastric malignancy. Consider additional follow-up and diagnostic testing in patients who have a suboptimal response or an early symptomatic relapse after completing treatment with Vonoprazan. In older patients, also consider endoscopy.
Acute Tubulointerstitial Nephritis
Aute tubulointerstitial nephritis (TIN) has been reported with Vonoprazan. If suspected, discontinue Vonoprazan and evaluate patients with suspected acute TIN.
Clostridioides difficile-Associated Diarrhoea
Published observational studies suggest that proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) may be associated with an increased risk of Clostridioides difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD), especially in hospitalized patients. Vonoprazan, another drug that blocks the proton pump to inhibit gastric acid production, may also increase the risk of CDAD. Consider CDAD in patients with diarrhoea that does not improve. Use the shortest duration of Vonoprazan appropriate to the condition being treated.
CDAD has been reported with use of nearly all antibacterial agents. For more information specific to antibacterial agents (clarithromycin and amoxicillin) indicated for use in combination with Vonoprazan, refer to Warnings and Precautions section of the corresponding prescribing information.
Bone Fracture
Several published observational studies suggest that PPI therapy may be associated with an increased risk for osteoporosis-related fractures of the hip, wrist or spine. The risk of fracture was increased in patients who received high-dose, defined as multiple daily doses, and long-term therapy (a year or longer). Bone fracture, including osteoporosis-related fracture, has also been reported with vonoprazan. Use the shortest duration of Vonoprazan appropriate to the condition being treated. Patients at risk for osteoporosis-related fractures should be managed according to the established treatment guidelines.
Severe Cutaneous Adverse Reactions
Severe cutaneous adverse reactions, including Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) have been reported with Vonoprazan. Discontinue Vonoprazan at the first signs or symptoms of severe cutaneous adverse reactions or other signs of hypersensitivity and consider further evaluation.
Vitamin B12 (Cobalamin) Deficiency
Long-term use of acid-suppressing drugs can lead to malabsorption of Vitamin B12 caused by hypo- or achlorhydria. Vitamin B12 deficiency has been reported postmarketing with vonoprazan. If clinical symptoms consistent with Vitamin B12 deficiency are observed in patients treated with Vonoprazan consider further workup.
Hypomagnesemia and Mineral Metabolism
Hypomagnesemia has been reported postmarketing with vonoprazan. Hypomagnesemia may lead to hypocalcemia and/or hypokalemia and may exacerbate underlying hypocalcemia in at-risk patients.
Consider monitoring magnesium levels prior to initiation of Vonoprazan and periodically in patients expected to be on prolonged treatment, in patients taking drugs that may have increased toxicity in the presence of hypomagnesemia (e.g., digoxin), or drugs that may cause hypomagnesemia (e.g., diuretics). Treatment of hypomagnesemia may require magnesium replacement and discontinuation of Vonoprazan.
Consider monitoring magnesium and calcium levels prior to initiation of Vonoprazan and periodically while on treatment in patients with a preexisting risk of hypocalcemia (e.g., hypoparathyroidism). Supplement with magnesium and/or calcium, as necessary. If hypocalcemia is refractory to treatment, consider discontinuing Vonoprazan.
Interactions with Diagnostic Investigations for Neuroendocrine Tumors
Serum chromogranin A (CgA) levels increase secondary to drug-induced decreases in gastric acidity. The increased CgA level may cause false positive results in diagnostic investigations for neuroendocrine tumors. Temporarily discontinue Vonoprazan treatment at least 14 days before assessing CgA levels and consider repeating the test if initial CgA levels are high. If serial tests are performed (e.g., for monitoring), the same commercial laboratory should be used for testing, as reference ranges between tests may vary.
Fundic Gland Polyps
Use of Vonoprazan is associated with a risk of fundic gland polyps that increases with long-term use, especially beyond one year. Fundic gland polyps have been reported with vonoprazan in clinical trials and post-marketing use with PPIs. Most patients who developed fundic gland polyps were asymptomatic and fundic gland polyps were identified incidentally on endoscopy. Use the shortest duration of Vonoprazan appropriate to the condition being treated.
Drug Interactions:
Table 5 and Table 6 include drugs with clinically important drug interactions and interaction with diagnostics when administered concomitantly with Vonoprazan and instructions for preventing or managing them.
These recommendations are based on either drug interaction trials or predicted interactions due to the expected magnitude of interaction and potential for serious adverse reactions or loss of efficacy.
Consult the labeling of concomitantly used drugs to obtain further information about interactions with Vonoprazan.
Endoscopic Management Strategies for GERD: Are They Worthy of Attention?
Cognizant of the Fact That Refractory Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Can be Detected by Quantification of Bacterial Overgrowth in Small Intestine?
Cognizant of the Fact That Refractory Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Can be Detected by Quantification of Bacterial Overgrowth in Small Intestine?
Explore how bacterial overgrowth may uncover refractory GERD issues.Cognizant of the Fact That Refractory Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Can be Detected by Quantification of Bacterial Overgrowth in Small Intestine?
Apprised of the Hemostatic Strategies and Their Intricacies for Management of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding?
Apprised of the Hemostatic Strategies and Their Intricacies for Management of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding?
Don't Miss: Endoscopy's Role In GI BleedingApprised of the Hemostatic Strategies and Their Intricacies for Management of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding?
Preference for Diagnostic Testing with pH and Impedance Monitoring Over Empiric PPI Trial: Are There Any Benefits?
Preference for Diagnostic Testing with pH and Impedance Monitoring Over Empiric PPI Trial: Are There Any Benefits?
Discover why pH and impedance monitoring may be better than empiric PPI trials for reflux diagnosis.Preference for Diagnostic Testing with pH and Impedance Monitoring Over Empiric PPI Trial: Are There Any Benefits?
Meeting the Unmet Needs in GERD Management: Is VONOprazan the Answer?
Meeting the Unmet Needs in GERD Management: Is VONOprazan the Answer?
Tackle GERD Now with VonoprazanVONOprazan: Rapid Relief, Faster Results!
VONOprazan: Rapid Relief, Faster Results!
Vonoprazan: Fast-Acting Relief vs. PPIsPPI Usage Is on the Rise, But Are All Your Patients Achieving Full Remission?
PPI Usage Is on the Rise, But Are All Your Patients Achieving Full Remission?
PPI Usage Surges...Are Patients Fully Healed?PPI Usage Is on the Rise, But Are All Your Patients Achieving Full Remission?
Key Factors: Driving the Progression From Reflux-Induced Esophagitis to Barrett’s Esophagus and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma
Key Factors: Driving the Progression From Reflux-Induced Esophagitis to Barrett’s Esophagus and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma
Barrett’s Esophagus and EAC: Who's Most at Risk?Key Factors: Driving the Progression From Reflux-Induced Esophagitis to Barrett’s Esophagus and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma
PPI-Refractory GERD: A Growing Concern
PPI-Refractory GERD: A Growing Concern
Act Now: Addressing PPI-Refractory GERDDetecting and Handling Refractory GERD: The Schemas at Work
Detecting and Handling Refractory GERD: The Schemas at Work
Mastering Refractory Gerd: The Effective SchemasDetecting and Handling Refractory GERD: The Schemas at Work
Nomogram predicts cancer-specific survival for patients with primary gastrointestinal melanoma
Nomogram predicts cancer-specific survival for patients with primary gastrointestinal melanoma
According to a recent study, it was validated that nomogram can predict cancer-specific survival and develop a risk stratification system for patients with primary gastrointestinal melanoma. The findings of the study were published in The Turkish Journal of Gastroenterology.
Results from a database of 433 patients with primary gastrointestinal melanoma were included in the study after randomly dividing the participants into training and validation cohorts (8:2). The nomogram was constructed based on the risk factors identified in the multivariate Cox regression analysis. Based on the nomogram, a risk stratification system was developed. Time-dependent receiver operating characteristic, calibration curve, and decision curve analysis were performed.
All cases were randomly divided into either the training (n = 347, 80%) or validation cohort (n = 86, 20%). For all patients, the median cancer-specific survival (CSS) time was 18.0 months (95% CI: 14.7-21.3). The median CSS was 18.0 months (95% CI: 14.5-21.5) and 18.0 months (95% CI: 10.7-25.3) in the training and validation cohorts, respectively (log-rank test, P = .241).
It was found that CSS under the curves of the nomogram for 6-, 12-, and 18-month were 0.789, 0.757, and 0.726 for internal validation, and 0.796, 0.763, and 0.795 for the external validation. Furthermore, the patients were divided into 2 risk sub-groups to study the risk stratification, low-risk (point: 0-182) and high-risk (point: 183-333). The median CSS was 31.0 months (95% CI: 24.5-37.5) in the low-risk subgroup and 8.0 months (95% CI: 6.2-9.8) in the high-risk subgroup. The Kaplan-Meier analysis and the log-rank test demonstrated that the risk stratification was well-differentiated in patients with varying risks of cancer-specific survival.
Thus, it can be concluded that the nomogram prediction model may be practical for validation of cancer-specific survival and development of a risk stratification system in patients with primary gastrointestinal melanoma.
Nomogram predicts cancer-specific survival for patients with primary gastrointestinal melanoma
Nomogram predicts cancer-specific survival for patients with primary gastrointestinal melanoma
According to a recent study, it was validated that nomogram can predict cancer-specific survival and develop a risk stratification system for patients with primary gastrointestinal melanoma. The findings of the study were published in The Turkish Journal of Gastroenterology.
Results from a database of 433 patients with primary gastrointestinal melanoma were included in the study after randomly dividing the participants into training and validation cohorts (8:2). The nomogram was constructed based on the risk factors identified in the multivariate Cox regression analysis. Based on the nomogram, a risk stratification system was developed. Time-dependent receiver operating characteristic, calibration curve, and decision curve analysis were performed.
All cases were randomly divided into either the training (n = 347, 80%) or validation cohort (n = 86, 20%). For all patients, the median cancer-specific survival (CSS) time was 18.0 months (95% CI: 14.7-21.3). The median CSS was 18.0 months (95% CI: 14.5-21.5) and 18.0 months (95% CI: 10.7-25.3) in the training and validation cohorts, respectively (log-rank test, P = .241).
It was found that CSS under the curves of the nomogram for 6-, 12-, and 18-month were 0.789, 0.757, and 0.726 for internal validation, and 0.796, 0.763, and 0.795 for the external validation. Furthermore, the patients were divided into 2 risk sub-groups to study the risk stratification, low-risk (point: 0-182) and high-risk (point: 183-333). The median CSS was 31.0 months (95% CI: 24.5-37.5) in the low-risk subgroup and 8.0 months (95% CI: 6.2-9.8) in the high-risk subgroup. The Kaplan-Meier analysis and the log-rank test demonstrated that the risk stratification was well-differentiated in patients with varying risks of cancer-specific survival.
Thus, it can be concluded that the nomogram prediction model may be practical for validation of cancer-specific survival and development of a risk stratification system in patients with primary gastrointestinal melanoma.
3 L split-dose PEG regimen superior to 2 L PEG regimen for colonoscopic bowel preparation
3 L split-dose PEG regimen superior to 2 L PEG regimen for colonoscopic bowel preparation
A recent study demonstrated that 3 L split-dose polyethylene glycol (PEG) is superior to 2 L polyethylene glycol for colonoscopic bowel preparation in individuals with relatively high BMI. This study was published in the journal, BMC Gastroenterology.
This was a multicenter randomized controlled trial that included 710 individuals with high BMIs (≥ 24 kg/m2), who were scheduled to undergo colonoscopy. The participants were randomly assigned into the 3 L split-dose polyethylene glycol (PEG) group (n=353) and the 2 L PEG group (n=357). The primary outcome of the study was the rate of adequate bowel preparation, and the secondary outcomes included the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) score, polyp detection rate, cecal intubation rate, and adverse reactions during bowel preparation. Additionally, the study had exploratory subgroup analyses for adequate bowel preparation.
After enrollment, 15 participants did not undergo colonoscopy, only 345 participants received 3 L split-dose PEG regimen, and 350 participants received 2 L PEG regimen for colonoscopic bowel preparation. It was shown that the rate of adequate bowel preparation was superior in the 3 L split-dose PEG regimen (81.2%) compared to the 2 L PEG regimen (74.9%). Additionally, it was found that the BBPS score (6.71±1.15 vs. 6.37±1.31) and the rate of polyp detection (62.0% vs. 52.9%) were better with the 3 L split-dose PEG regimen compared to the 2 L PEG regimen. In the subgroup analysis, the 3 L split-dose PEG regimen performed better than the 2 L PEG regimen in the overweight individuals (BMI 25-29.9 kg/m2).
These findings suggest that a 3 L split-dose PEG regimen is superior to a 2 L PEG regimen for colonoscopic bowel preparation in individuals with high BMI (25-29.9 kg/m2).
3 L split-dose PEG regimen superior to 2 L PEG regimen for colonoscopic bowel preparation
3 L split-dose PEG regimen superior to 2 L PEG regimen for colonoscopic bowel preparation
A recent study demonstrated that 3 L split-dose polyethylene glycol (PEG) is superior to 2 L polyethylene glycol for colonoscopic bowel preparation in individuals with relatively high BMI. This study was published in the journal, BMC Gastroenterology.
This was a multicenter randomized controlled trial that included 710 individuals with high BMIs (≥ 24 kg/m2), who were scheduled to undergo colonoscopy. The participants were randomly assigned into the 3 L split-dose polyethylene glycol (PEG) group (n=353) and the 2 L PEG group (n=357). The primary outcome of the study was the rate of adequate bowel preparation, and the secondary outcomes included the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) score, polyp detection rate, cecal intubation rate, and adverse reactions during bowel preparation. Additionally, the study had exploratory subgroup analyses for adequate bowel preparation.
After enrollment, 15 participants did not undergo colonoscopy, only 345 participants received 3 L split-dose PEG regimen, and 350 participants received 2 L PEG regimen for colonoscopic bowel preparation. It was shown that the rate of adequate bowel preparation was superior in the 3 L split-dose PEG regimen (81.2%) compared to the 2 L PEG regimen (74.9%). Additionally, it was found that the BBPS score (6.71±1.15 vs. 6.37±1.31) and the rate of polyp detection (62.0% vs. 52.9%) were better with the 3 L split-dose PEG regimen compared to the 2 L PEG regimen. In the subgroup analysis, the 3 L split-dose PEG regimen performed better than the 2 L PEG regimen in the overweight individuals (BMI 25-29.9 kg/m2).
These findings suggest that a 3 L split-dose PEG regimen is superior to a 2 L PEG regimen for colonoscopic bowel preparation in individuals with high BMI (25-29.9 kg/m2).
Antibiotic prophylaxis results in lower risk of infectious complications before ERCP in patients with biliary obstruction
Antibiotic prophylaxis results in lower risk of infectious complications before ERCP in patients with biliary obstruction
A recent study suggests that incidence of postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) infections was significantly lower with antibiotic prophylaxis in patients with biliary obstruction. The study's findings were published in The American Journal of Gastroenterology.
This double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial included 378 patients who were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either a single dose of 1 g intravenous cefoxitin (n=189) or normal saline (n=189; placebo), 30 minutes before undergoing ERCP. The incidence of infectious complications after ERCP comprised the primary outcome of this trial.
At the end of the study, it was found that the risk of infectious complications after ERCP was 2.8% and 9.8% in the antibiotic prophylaxis group and placebo group, respectively. The incidence rates of bacteremia in the antibiotic prophylaxis and placebo groups were 2.3% and 6.4%, respectively. Finally, the incidence rate of cholangitis was 1.7% in the antibiotic prophylaxis group and 6.4% in the placebo group.
Based on the above results, it can be concluded that before ERCP, antibiotic prophylaxis resulted in a significantly lower risk of infectious complications, especially cholangitis, in patients with biliary obstruction.
Antibiotic prophylaxis results in lower risk of infectious complications before ERCP in patients with biliary obstruction
Antibiotic prophylaxis results in lower risk of infectious complications before ERCP in patients with biliary obstruction
A recent study suggests that incidence of postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) infections was significantly lower with antibiotic prophylaxis in patients with biliary obstruction. The study's findings were published in The American Journal of Gastroenterology.
This double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial included 378 patients who were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either a single dose of 1 g intravenous cefoxitin (n=189) or normal saline (n=189; placebo), 30 minutes before undergoing ERCP. The incidence of infectious complications after ERCP comprised the primary outcome of this trial.
At the end of the study, it was found that the risk of infectious complications after ERCP was 2.8% and 9.8% in the antibiotic prophylaxis group and placebo group, respectively. The incidence rates of bacteremia in the antibiotic prophylaxis and placebo groups were 2.3% and 6.4%, respectively. Finally, the incidence rate of cholangitis was 1.7% in the antibiotic prophylaxis group and 6.4% in the placebo group.
Based on the above results, it can be concluded that before ERCP, antibiotic prophylaxis resulted in a significantly lower risk of infectious complications, especially cholangitis, in patients with biliary obstruction.
Risankizumab is safe and effective in patients with Crohn's disease
Risankizumab is safe and effective in patients with Crohn's disease
A recent study found that risankizumab, an anti-interleukin-23 antibody is safe and effective in patients with moderate-to-severe Crohn’s disease. This study’s findings were published in the Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology.
This was a post hoc sub analysis of the global phase 3 ADVANCE, MOTIVATE, and FORTIFY studies. ADVANCE and MOTIVATE were double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 induction studies that included a total of 198 patients who had previously experienced intolerance or inadequate response to biologic (MOTIVATE) or a conventional therapy (ADVANCE). The participants were randomized to receive intravenous risankizumab (600 or 1200 mg) or placebo at weeks 0, 4, and 8. The clinical responders to risankizumab entered the placebo-controlled maintenance withdrawal study (FORTIFY). Patients were re-randomized to receive subcutaneous risankizumab (180 or 360 mg) or placebo (withdrawal) every 8 weeks for 52 weeks.
Among 198 patients in the induction studies, the rates of clinical remission and endoscopic response at week 12 were achieved by 61.4% and 40.0% of patients in the risankizumab 600 mg group, 59.5% and 35.8% of patients in the risankizumab 1200 mg group, and 27.3% and 9.1% of patients in the placebo group, respectively. At week 52, among 67 patients who entered the maintenance study, clinical remission and endoscopic response rates were achieved by 57.1% and 52.4% of patients in the risankizumab 180 mg group, 75.0% and 40.0% of patients in the risankizumab 360 mg group, and 53.8% and 34.6% of patients in the placebo (withdrawal) group. Additionally, it was observed that fistula closure was observed in 28.6% (induction) and 57.1% (maintenance) of patients with risankizumab treatment.
Based on the above findings, it may be concluded that risankizumab was effective and well tolerated in patients with Crohn's disease.
Risankizumab is safe and effective in patients with Crohn's disease
Risankizumab is safe and effective in patients with Crohn's disease
A recent study found that risankizumab, an anti-interleukin-23 antibody is safe and effective in patients with moderate-to-severe Crohn’s disease. This study’s findings were published in the Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology.
This was a post hoc sub analysis of the global phase 3 ADVANCE, MOTIVATE, and FORTIFY studies. ADVANCE and MOTIVATE were double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 induction studies that included a total of 198 patients who had previously experienced intolerance or inadequate response to biologic (MOTIVATE) or a conventional therapy (ADVANCE). The participants were randomized to receive intravenous risankizumab (600 or 1200 mg) or placebo at weeks 0, 4, and 8. The clinical responders to risankizumab entered the placebo-controlled maintenance withdrawal study (FORTIFY). Patients were re-randomized to receive subcutaneous risankizumab (180 or 360 mg) or placebo (withdrawal) every 8 weeks for 52 weeks.
Among 198 patients in the induction studies, the rates of clinical remission and endoscopic response at week 12 were achieved by 61.4% and 40.0% of patients in the risankizumab 600 mg group, 59.5% and 35.8% of patients in the risankizumab 1200 mg group, and 27.3% and 9.1% of patients in the placebo group, respectively. At week 52, among 67 patients who entered the maintenance study, clinical remission and endoscopic response rates were achieved by 57.1% and 52.4% of patients in the risankizumab 180 mg group, 75.0% and 40.0% of patients in the risankizumab 360 mg group, and 53.8% and 34.6% of patients in the placebo (withdrawal) group. Additionally, it was observed that fistula closure was observed in 28.6% (induction) and 57.1% (maintenance) of patients with risankizumab treatment.
Based on the above findings, it may be concluded that risankizumab was effective and well tolerated in patients with Crohn's disease.
Efficacy of botulinum toxin type A (BoNTA) injections for the treatment of faecal incontinence
Efficacy of botulinum toxin type A (BoNTA) injections for the treatment of faecal incontinence
A recent study suggests that intrarectal botulinum toxin type A (BoNTA) injections are an efficacious treatment for urge faecal incontinence. This study was published in the journal, The Lancet. Gastroenterology & Hepatology.
This phase 3 study was a double-blind, multicentre, randomized trial that included 200 adult patients who had experienced a failure of conservative or surgical treatment or had at least one urgency or faecal incontinence episode per week for a minimum of 3 months. After withdrawals, the patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either 200 units of BoNTA (n=96) or an equivalent volume of saline or placebo (n=95) injections. Three months after treatment, the number of episodes of faecal incontinence and urgency recorded in 21-day patient bowel diaries served as the primary endpoint. For the primary analysis, a modified intention-to-treat (mITT) approach was utilized, with adjustment for baseline faecal incontinence and urgency episodes.
At the end of the study, it was observed that in the BoNTA group, the mean number of faecal incontinence and urgency episodes per day, decreased from 1·9 at baseline to 0.8 at 3 months after the injections were administered while in the placebo group, it decreased from 1.4 to 1.0. The trial did not report any serious treatment-related adverse events. The non-serious adverse event (treatment-related or not) that was frequently seen was constipation, seen in 68 patients in the BoNTA group and 38 patients in the placebo group. From the above results, it can be concluded that BoNTA injections are an efficacious treatment for urge faecal incontinence in adult patients.
Efficacy of botulinum toxin type A (BoNTA) injections for the treatment of faecal incontinence
Efficacy of botulinum toxin type A (BoNTA) injections for the treatment of faecal incontinence
A recent study suggests that intrarectal botulinum toxin type A (BoNTA) injections are an efficacious treatment for urge faecal incontinence. This study was published in the journal, The Lancet. Gastroenterology & Hepatology.
This phase 3 study was a double-blind, multicentre, randomized trial that included 200 adult patients who had experienced a failure of conservative or surgical treatment or had at least one urgency or faecal incontinence episode per week for a minimum of 3 months. After withdrawals, the patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either 200 units of BoNTA (n=96) or an equivalent volume of saline or placebo (n=95) injections. Three months after treatment, the number of episodes of faecal incontinence and urgency recorded in 21-day patient bowel diaries served as the primary endpoint. For the primary analysis, a modified intention-to-treat (mITT) approach was utilized, with adjustment for baseline faecal incontinence and urgency episodes.
At the end of the study, it was observed that in the BoNTA group, the mean number of faecal incontinence and urgency episodes per day, decreased from 1·9 at baseline to 0.8 at 3 months after the injections were administered while in the placebo group, it decreased from 1.4 to 1.0. The trial did not report any serious treatment-related adverse events. The non-serious adverse event (treatment-related or not) that was frequently seen was constipation, seen in 68 patients in the BoNTA group and 38 patients in the placebo group. From the above results, it can be concluded that BoNTA injections are an efficacious treatment for urge faecal incontinence in adult patients.
How would you rate this Medshorts
Thank you !
Your rating has been recorded.
-
-
Gastro + 1Gastro , Gastro Intestinal…
Clinical Safety and Tolerability of Vonoprazan by Prof. Hidekazu Suzuki
-
Gastro Intestinal… + 1Gastro Intestinal… , Gastro
Clinical Efficacy of Vonoprazan in Gastric Acid Complications
-
Gastro Intestinal… + 1Gastro Intestinal… , Gastro
Discerning the MOA of Vonoprazan in Gastric Acid Management by Prof. Hidekazu Suzuki
Videos Speakers
Below fields are needed for webinar purpose.