Maintaining remission of ulcerative colitis with the probiotic Escherichia coli Nissle 1917 is as effective as with standard mesalazine. Double-blind comparison of an oral Escherichia coli preparation and mesalazine in maintaining remission of ulcerative colitis. A randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial with Lactobacillus acidophilus La-5 and Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis BB-12 for maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis. Probiotic administration in patients with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis is associated with expansion of mucosal regulatory cells. Synbiotic therapy (Bifidobacterium longum/Synergy 1) initiates resolution of inflammation in patients with active ulcerative colitis: a randomised controlled pilot trial. Efficacy of Lactobacillus GG in maintaining remission of ulcerative colitis. 5-Aminosalicylic acid suppositories in the maintenance of remission in idiopathic proctitis or proctosigmoiditis: a double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial. Direct comparison of two different mesalamine formulations for the induction of remission in patients with ulcerative colitis: a double-blind, randomized study. Probiotic treatment of collagenous colitis: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with Lactobacillus acidophilus and Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. Lactis.
Evidence exists for the pathogenic role of the enteric flora in inflammatory bowel disease. Probiotics contain living microorganisms which exert health effects on the host. We compared the efficacy in maintaining remission of the probiotic preparation Escherichia coli Nissle 1917 and established therapy with mesalazine in patients with ulcerative colitis.
                In total, 327 patients were recruited and assigned to a double blind, double dummy trial to receive either the probiotic drug 200 mg once daily (n = 162) or mesalazine 500 mg three times daily (n = 165). The study lasted for 12 months and patients were assessed by clinical and endoscopic activity indices (Rachmilewitz) as well as by histology. The primary aim of the study was to confirm equivalent efficacy of the two drugs in the prevention of relapses.
                The per protocol analysis revealed relapses in 40/110 (36.4%) patients in the E coli Nissle 1917 group and 38/112 (33.9%) in the mesalazine group (significant equivalence p = 0.003). Subgroup analyses showed no differences between the treatment groups in terms of duration and localisation of disease or pretrial treatment. Safety profile and tolerability were very good for both groups and were not different.
                The probiotic drug E coli Nissle 1917 shows efficacy and safety in maintaining remission equivalent to the gold standard mesalazine in patients with ulcerative colitis. The effectiveness of probiotic treatment further underlines the pathogenetic significance of the enteric flora. Aminosalicylates are used as standard treatment for maintaining remission in ulcerative colitis. As yet, there is no other existing alternative with proven efficacy. In light of the hypothesis that the intestinal environment may contribute to the pathophysiology of ulcerative colitis, a trial was conducted to test the effects of probiotic treatment with an oral preparation of non-pathogenic E. coli.
                A total of 120 patients with inactive ulcerative colitis were included in a double-blind, double-dummy study comparing mesalazine 500 mg t.d.s. to an oral preparation of viable E. coli strain Nissle (Serotype 06: K5: H1) for 12 weeks with regard to their efficacy in preventing a relapse of the disease. Study objectives were to assess the equivalence of the clinical activity index (CAI) under the two treatment modalities and to compare relapse rates, relapse-free times and global assessment.
                The start and end scores of the CAI demonstrated no significant difference (P = 0.12) between the two treatment groups. Relapse rates were 11.3% under mesalazine and 16.0% under E. coli Nissle 1917 (N.S.). Life table analysis showed a relapse-free time of 103 +/- 4 days for mesalazine and 106 +/- 5 days for E. coli Nissle 1917 (N.S.). Global assessment was similar for both groups. Tolerability to the treatment was excellent and did not differ. No serious adverse events were reported.
                From the results of this preliminary study, probiotic treatment appears to offer another option for maintenance therapy of ulcerative colitis. Additional support is provided for the hypothesis of a pathophysiological role for the intestinal environment in ulcerative colitis. To investigate the clinical effect of treatment with Lactobacillus acidophilus La-5 and Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis BB-12 (Probio-Tec AB-25) to maintain remission in patients with ulcerative colitis.
                Patients with left-sided ulcerative colitis in remission - including proctitis and at least one relapse within the last year were randomised (2:1) in a double-blind placebo-controlled study to Probio-Tec AB-25 or placebo for 52 weeks. The patients were evaluated clinically, endoscopically and histologically at entry and if relapsing. No other medication for ulcerative colitis than the study drug was allowed during the study. Primary endpoint was maintenance of clinical remission, secondary endpoints comparisons of days to relapse, and safety and tolerability of the study drug. The concentrations of the probiotic bacterial strains in stool were analysed in a subset of patients.
                Thirty-two patients were randomised. Twenty patients received Probio-Tec AB-25 and twelve patients received placebo. Five patients (25%) in the Probio-Tec AB-25 group and one patient (8%) in the placebo group maintained remission after 1 year of treatment (p=0.37). The median time to relapse was 125.5days (range 11-391 days) in the probiotic group and 104 days (range 28-369 days) in the placebo group respectively, (p=0.683). Probio-Tec AB-25 was overall well tolerated.
                In this small randomised placebo-controlled trial no significant clinical benefit of Probio-Tec AB-25 could be demonstrated in comparison with placebo for maintaining remission in patients with left-sided ulcerative colitis. A difference may be achieved in larger studies, but the clinical significance of this would be questionable. This study was registered in ClinicalTrial.gov (NCT00268164).
                Copyright © 2010 European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Probiotics have anti-inflammatory effects in patients with inflammatory bowel disease and appear to regulate mucosal immune response through reductions in proinflammatory cytokines. The probiotic VSL#3 prevents pouchitis if started within a week of ileostomy closure and maintains remission following antibacterial treatment in patients with refractory or recurrent pouchitis. However, the efficacy of probiotics and their effects on regulatory cells if started at a greater time after surgery in patients undergoing ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) for ulcerative colitis are unknown.
                We conducted an open-label study in which 31 patients at different periods from surgery without signs and symptoms of pouchitis were randomized to 2 sachets of VSL#3 once daily or no treatment for 12 months. Pouchitis disease activity index (PDAI) was evaluated at baseline and after 3, 6, and 12 months. The percentage of CD4+ T lymphocytes expressing CD25 and the inactive form of transforming growth factor-beta [latency-associated peptide (LAP)] were evaluated at baseline and after 3 and 6 months in peripheral-blood mononuclear cells and mucosal biopsies. Variation in tissue interleukin-1beta and Foxp3 mRNA expression was also evaluated.
                During the study period, VSL#3-treated patients showed a significant reduction in PDAI score and a significant increase in the percentage of mucosal CD4+CD25(high) and CD4+ LAP-positive cells compared with baseline values. Tissue samples at different points showed a significant reduction in IL-1beta mRNA expression, and a significant increase in Foxp3 mRNA expression.
                We conclude that VSL#3 administration in patients with IPAA modulates the PDAI and expands the number of mucosal regulatory T cells. Ulcerative colitis (UC) is an acute and chronic inflammatory disease of the large bowel with unknown aetiology. The immune response against normal commensal microorganisms is believed to drive inflammatory processes associated with UC. Therefore, modulation of bacterial communities on the gut mucosa, through the use of probiotics and prebiotics, may be used to modify the disease state.
                A synbiotic was developed for use in UC patients combining a probiotic, Bifidobacterium longum, isolated from healthy rectal epithelium, and a prebiotic (Synergy 1), a preferential inulin-oligofructose growth substrate for the probiotic strain. Treatment was employed in a double blinded randomised controlled trial using 18 patients with active UC for a period of one month. Clinical status was scored and rectal biopsies were collected before and after treatment, and transcription levels of epithelium related immune markers were measured.
                Sigmoidoscopy scores (scale 0-6) were reduced in the test group (start 4.5 (1.4), end 3.1 (2.5)) compared with placebo (start 2.6 (2.1), end 3.2 (2.2)) (p=0.06). mRNA levels for human beta defensins 2, 3, and 4, which are strongly upregulated in active UC, were significantly reduced in the test group after treatment (p=0.016, 0.038, and 0.008, respectively). Tumour necrosis factor alpha and interleukin 1alpha, which are inflammatory cytokines that drive inflammation and induce defensin expression, were also significantly reduced after treatment (p=0.018 and 0.023, respectively). Biopsies in the test group had reduced inflammation and regeneration of epithelial tissue.
                Short term synbiotic treatment of active UC resulted in improvement of the full clinical appearance of chronic inflammation in patients receiving this therapy. Aminosalicylates are the mainstay of therapy to prevent relapse of quiescent ulcerative colitis. The rationale for using probiotics is based on the evidence implicating intestinal bacteria in the pathogenesis of this disorder.
                To evaluate the efficacy of Lactobacillus GG alone or in combination with mesalazine vs. mesalazine as maintenance treatment in ulcerative colitis.
                187 ulcerative colitis patients with quiescent disease were randomized to receive Lactobacillus GG 18 x 10(9) viable bacteria/day (65 patients), mesalazine 2400 mg/day (60 patients) or Lactobacillus GG + mesalazine (62 patients). Disease activity index, endoscopic and histological scores were determined at 0, 6 and 12 months and in case of relapse. The primary end point was to evaluate sustained remission.
                Overall analysis showed no difference in relapse rate at 6 (P = 0.44) and 12 months (P = 0.77) among the three treatment groups. However, the treatment with Lactobacillus GG seems to be more effective than standard treatment with mesalazine in prolonging the relapse-free time (P < 0.05).
                Lactobacillus GG seems to be effective and safe for maintaining remission in patients with ulcerative colitis, and it could represent a good therapeutic option for preventing relapse in this group of patients. Thirty patients with distal ulcerative colitis in remission (17 proctitis, 13 proctosigmoiditis) were randomly given either 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) or placebo suppositories, 400 mg bid. During the 1-yr follow-up, patients were assessed clinically every month, and flexible sigmoidoscopy with a rectal pinch biopsy specimen and laboratory data were carried out every 3 months. Two patients in the 5-ASA group chose to withdraw from the study, one relapsed, and 12 remained in remission. In the placebo group, one patient chose to withdraw, 11 relapsed, and three remained in remission. The cumulative remission rate at the 12th month was 92% in the 5-ASA group and 21% in the placebo group. Log rank test showed a significant difference in the relapse rate between the two groups (chi 2 = 14.26, p less than 0.001). No side effects were observed. We conclude that 5-ASA in suppository form (800 mg/day), administered for 1 yr, is safe and effective in maintaining remission of distal ulcerative colitis. Mesalamine is the first-line drug for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). We directly compared the efficacy and safety of two mesalamine formulations for the induction of remission in patients with UC.
                In a multicenter, double-blind, randomized study, 229 patients with mild-to-moderate active UC were assigned to 4 groups: 66 and 65 received a pH-dependent release formulation of 2.4 g/day (pH-2.4 g) or 3.6 g/day (pH-3.6 g), respectively; 65 received a time-dependent release formulation of 2.25 g/day (Time-2.25 g), and 33 received placebo (Placebo). The drugs were administered three times daily for eight weeks. The primary endpoint was a decrease in the UC disease activity index (UC-DAI).
                In the full analysis set (n = 225) the decrease in UC-DAI in each group was 1.5 in pH-2.4 g, 2.9 in pH-3.6 g, 1.3 in Time-2.25 g and 0.3 in Placebo, respectively. These results demonstrate the superiority of pH-3.6 g over Time-2.25 g (P = 0.003) and the noninferiority of pH-2.4 g to Time-2.25 g. Among the patients with proctitis-type UC, a significant decrease in UC-DAI was observed in pH-2.4 g and pH-3.6 g as compared to Placebo, but not in Time-2.25 g. No differences were observed in the safety profiles.
                Higher dose of the pH-dependent release formulation was more effective for induction of remission in patients with mild-to-moderate active UC. Additionally, the pH-dependent release formulation was preferable to the time-dependent release formulation for patients with proctitis-type UC (UMIN Clinical Trials Registry, no. C000000288). Probiotic treatment may be effective in diseases involving gut microflora and intestinal inflammation. In collagenous colitis (CC), a potential pathogenic role of the gut microflora has been proposed. The effect of probiotic treatment in CC is unknown. Our aim was to investigate the clinical effect of treatment with Lactobacillus acidophilus LA-5 and Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis BB-12 (AB-Cap-10) in patients with CC.
                Patients with CC and diarrhea were in a double-blind placebo-controlled study randomized (2:1) to AB-Cap-10 or placebo for 12 weeks. The primary end point was reduction in bowel frequency per week of >or=50%. Secondary end points were changes in bowel frequencies, stool consistency, stool weight, histopathology, and abdominal bloating and pain.
                Twenty-nine patients were randomized: 21 to probiotics and 8 to placebo. Reduction in bowel frequency per week of >or=50% occurred in 6 of 21 (29%) and in 1 of 8 (13%) patients receiving probiotic and placebo, respectively (P = 0.635). No differences between treatments were observed regarding the secondary end points. Post hoc analysis showed a median reduction in bowel frequency per week from 32 (range 18-84) to 23 (range 11-56; P < 0.005), a reduction in number of days with liquid stools per week from 6 days (range 0-7 days) to 1 day (range 0-7 days; P < 0.005), and an increase in number of days with solid stools per week (P < 0.05) in the AB-Cap-10 group.
                AB-Cap-10 had no significant effect on the chosen end points. Post hoc analysis demonstrated amelioration of clinical symptoms in the AB-Cap-10 group, indicating that probiotic treatment may potentially influence the disease course of CC.
Conventional therapy combined with a probiotic does not improve overall remission rates in patients with mild to moderate ulcerative colitis. However, there is limited evidence that probiotics added to standard therapy may provide modest benefits in terms of reduction of disease activity in patients with mild to moderately severe ulcerative colitis. Whether probiotics are as effective in patients with severe and more extensive disease and whether they can be used as an alternative to existing therapies is unknown. Further well designed, larger randomised controlled trials are needed to determine whether probiotics can be used as an alternative to current treatment modalities.