Azathioprine versus mesalazine for prevention of postoperative clinical recurrence in patients with Crohn's disease with endoscopic recurrence: efficacy and safety results of a randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, multicentre trial

ObjectiveThe aim of the study was to compare azathioprine versus mesalazine tablets for the prevention of clinical recurrence in patients with postoperative Crohn's disease (CD) with moderate or severe endoscopic recurrence.MethodsThis was a 1 year, double-blind, double-dummy, randomised study...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inGut Vol. 59; no. 6; pp. 752 - 759
Main Authors Reinisch, Walter, Angelberger, Sieglinde, Petritsch, Wolfgang, Shonova, Olga, Lukas, Milan, Bar-Meir, Simon, Teml, Alexander, Schaeffeler, Elke, Schwab, Matthias, Dilger, Karin, Greinwald, Roland, Mueller, Ralph, Stange, Eduard F, Herrlinger, Klaus R
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published London BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and British Society of Gastroenterology 01.06.2010
BMJ Publishing Group
BMJ Publishing Group LTD
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:ObjectiveThe aim of the study was to compare azathioprine versus mesalazine tablets for the prevention of clinical recurrence in patients with postoperative Crohn's disease (CD) with moderate or severe endoscopic recurrence.MethodsThis was a 1 year, double-blind, double-dummy, randomised study which took place in 21 gastroenterology centres in Austria, the Czech Republic, Germany and Israel. The study participants were 78 adults with CD who had undergone resection with ileocolonic anastomosis in the preceding 6–24 months without subsequent clinical recurrence and with a Crohn's disease activity index (CDAI) score <200, but with moderate or severe endoscopic recurrence. The study drugs were azathioprine 2.0–2.5 mg/kg/day or mesalazine 4 g/day over 1 year. The primary end point was therapeutic failure during 1 year, defined as a CDAI score ≥200 and an increase of ≥60 points from baseline, or study drug discontinuation due to lack of efficacy or intolerable adverse drug reaction.ResultsTreatment failure occurred in 22.0% (9/41) of azathioprine-treated patients and 10.8% (4/37) of mesalazine-treated patients, a difference of 11.1% (95% CI −5.0% to 27.3%, p=0.19). Clinical recurrence was significantly less frequent with azathioprine versus mesalazine (0/41 (0%) vs 4/37 (10.8%), p=0.031), whereas study drug discontinuation due to adverse drug reactions only occurred in azathioprine-treated patients (9/41 (22.0%) vs 0%, p=0.002). The proportion of patients showing ≥1 point reduction in Rutgeerts score between baseline and month 12 was 63.3% (19/30) and 34.4% (11/32) in the azathioprine and mesalazine groups, respectively (p=0.023).ConclusionsIn this population of patients with postoperative CD at high risk of clinical recurrence, superiority for azathioprine versus mesalazine could not be demonstrated for therapeutic failure.Clinical trial registration numberNCT00946946.
Bibliography:istex:4E37A2DC3ADD302ABBE222BC33B60A847BB968DF
local:gutjnl;59/6/752
ark:/67375/NVC-Z3FLJ7HP-9
href:gutjnl-59-752.pdf
ArticleID:gutjnl194159
ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-News-2
ObjectType-Feature-3
content type line 23
ISSN:0017-5749
1468-3288
DOI:10.1136/gut.2009.194159