Next Article in Journal
Computer-Aided Planning in Orthognathic Surgery: A Comparative Study with the Establishment of Burstone Analysis-Derived 3D Norms
Previous Article in Journal
The Innate Immune Cell Profile of the Cornea Predicts the Onset of Ocular Surface Inflammatory Disorders
Previous Article in Special Issue
Preventive Effect of Cardiotrophin-1 Administration before DSS-Induced Ulcerative Colitis in Mice
Open AccessArticle

Switching between Three Types of Mesalazine Formulation and Sulfasalazine in Patients with Active Ulcerative Colitis Who Have Already Received High-Dose Treatment with These Agents

1
Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama 700-8558, Japan
2
Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba 260-0856, Japan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Clin. Med. 2019, 8(12), 2109; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm8122109
Received: 18 November 2019 / Accepted: 27 November 2019 / Published: 2 December 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Ulcerative Colitis: Current and Emerging Treatment Strategies)
Background and aim: Oral mesalazine and sulfasalazine (SASP) are key drugs for treating ulcerative colitis (UC). The efficacy of switching from one of the several mesalazine formulations to another is largely unknown. This study assessed the efficacy of switching among three types of mesalazine formulation and SASP for UC therapy. Methods: UC patients receiving high-dose mesalazine/SASP who switched to other formulations due to disease activity were considered eligible. Efficacy was evaluated 2, 6, and 12 months after switching. Results: A total of 106 switches in 88 UC patients were analyzed. The efficacy at 2 months after switching was observed in 23/39 (59%) cases from any mesalazine formulation to SASP, in 18/55 (33%) cases from one mesalazine to another, and in 2/12 (17%) cases from SASP to any mesalazine formulation. Nine of 43 effective cases showed inefficacy or became intolerant post-switching. Delayed efficacy more than two months after switching was observed in four cases. Steroid-free remission was achieved in 42/106 (39%) cases—within 100 days in 35 of these cases (83%). Conclusions: Switching from mesalazine to SASP was effective in more than half of cases. The efficacy of switching between mesalazine formulations was lower but may be worth attempting in clinical practice from a safety perspective. View Full-Text
Keywords: ulcerative colitis; salicylates; mesalazine; sulfasalazine ulcerative colitis; salicylates; mesalazine; sulfasalazine
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Yasutomi, E.; Hiraoka, S.; Yamamoto, S.; Oka, S.; Hirai, M.; Yamasaki, Y.; Inokuchi, T.; Kinugasa, H.; Takahara, M.; Harada, K.; Kato, J.; Okada, H. Switching between Three Types of Mesalazine Formulation and Sulfasalazine in Patients with Active Ulcerative Colitis Who Have Already Received High-Dose Treatment with These Agents. J. Clin. Med. 2019, 8, 2109.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop