Abstract
Background. Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a common gastrointestinal disorder with symptoms of abdominal pain, discomfort, and altered bowel function. Antagonists of the type 3 serotonin receptor (5-HT3) have shown promising results in the relief of IBS-associated symptoms. We aimed to confirm these findings by doing a randomised, placebo-controlled trial. Methods. We studied 647 female IBS patients with diarrhoea-predominant or alternating bowel patterns (diarrhoea and constipation). 324 patients were assigned 1 mg alosetron and 323 placebo orally twice daily for 12 weeks, followed by a 4-week post-treatment period. Adequate relief of abdominal pain and discomfort was the primary endpoint; secondary endpoints included improvements in urgency, stool frequency, and stool consistency. Analysis was by intention to treat. Findings. 79 (24%) of patients in the alosetron group and 53 (16%) in the placebo group dropped out. The difference in the drop-out rate between groups was mainly due to a greater occurrence of constipation in the alosetron group. A greater proportion of alosetron-treated patients than placebo-treated patients (133 [41%] vs 94 [29%], respectively) reported adequate relief for all 3 months of treatment (difference 12% [4.7-19.2]). Alosetron also significantly decreased urgency and stool frequency, and increased stool firmness. Constipation occurred in 30% and 3% of patients in the alosetron and placebo groups, respectively. Interpretation. Alosetron was well tolerated and clinically effective in alleviating pain and bowel-related symptoms in this population of women with IBS.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 1035-1040 |
Number of pages | 6 |
Journal | Lancet |
Volume | 355 |
Issue number | 9209 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Mar 25 2000 |
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Medicine(all)
Access to Document
Other files and links
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Efficacy and safety of alosetron in women with irritable bowel syndrome: A randomised, placebo-controlled trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Standard
- Harvard
- Vancouver
- Author
- BIBTEX
- RIS
In: Lancet, Vol. 355, No. 9209, 25.03.2000, p. 1035-1040.
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Efficacy and safety of alosetron in women with irritable bowel syndrome
T2 - A randomised, placebo-controlled trial
AU - Camilleri, Michael
AU - Northcutt, Allison R.
AU - Kong, Steven
AU - Dukes, George E.
AU - McSorley, David
AU - Mangel, Allen W.
N1 - Funding Information: Alosetron significantly improved pain, urgency, stool frequency, and stool consistency after 1–2 weeks of therapy in women with IBS. Benefit persisted throughout all 12 weeks of treatment, and symptoms rapidly returned after cessation of therapy. Alosetron showed benefits over placebo for multiple endpoints. These results are important, since IBS pharmacotherapy has been difficult to assess, partly because of the variety of symptoms, and the substantial placebo effect in IBS patients. 18 Improvements in the symptoms of abdominal pain, urgency, and stool frequency are particularly notable since women with diarrhoea-predominant or alternating IBS report that these are the three most bothersome symptoms. 19 The endpoint (adequate relief of abdominal pain and discomfort) was developed to provide a meaningful, patient-assessed measurement of clinical improvement in the symptoms of IBS. After consultation with a panel of IBS experts, we concluded that for a new IBS therapeutic agent to be judged effective, it should provide adequate relief of IBS pain and discomfort for at least half of the assessments. In clinical trials, IBS patients who reported adequate relief had significantly greater improvement in IBS abdominal pain and abnormal bowel functions than patients who did not report adequate relief. 20,21 Adequate relief is in direct correlation with improved pain-severity scores, a greater percentage of pain-free days, fewer days with urgency, and fewer and firmer stools, and is therefore an endpoint that reflects improvement in multiple IBS-relevant dimensions. On the basis of observed increases in colonic transit time seen after treatment with 5-HT 3 receptor antagonists, 12,16,22 constipation was an anticipated consequence of alosetron treatment, especially since laxative use was not permitted in the study. IBS patients with constipation-predominant IBS were excluded from the study for these reasons. However, constipation did not seem to be perceived as a negative consequence of alosetron treatment when it occurred in the patients in our study, since most patients who reported constipation remained in the study. We assume that in clinical practice, IBS patients receiving alosetron would obtain customary care for constipation if needed. We studied only women, since the beneficial effects of alosetron have been shown more consistently in women than in men. 13,14 About 70% of IBS patients who present to physicians in western countries are women, although the reason for this predominance is not know. 23 Blood-brain perfusion patterns during colorectal distension differs between men and women with IBS, 24 and differences between men and women in motility and sensitivity to luminal distension have been observed in healthy volunteers. 25–27 Thus, there may be a physiological basis for the sex-specific efficacy of alosetron. 13,14 IBS symptoms have previously been recorded in clinical trials by use of paper diary-cards on which patients enter daily data. However, diary cards are limited by a lack of assurance that the data are entered at the prescribed time. Since these data are central to the calculation of the efficacy of therapeutic agents, we developed a touch-tone telephone diary system, which ensured the reliability and security of data entry. 17 The system was programmed to accept data only once in a 24-h period. By this system, patients' responses to daily questions about abdominal pain and bowel function, and weekly questions about adequate relief of IBS pain and discomfort were immediately captured in a secure central database. Failure to enter data daily resulted in the system notifying the investigators that the patient had not recorded symptoms over the past 24 h. This notification signalled the investigators to remind the patient to enter data on a daily basis, or to ascertain whether the patient was experiencing a problem. This system helped to keep patient's difficulties with maintaining daily and weekly assessments to a minimum, and to improve the consistency and reliability of the data. Contributors M Camilleri, A Northcutt, S Kong, G Dukes, D McSorley, and A Mangel planned the study, designed the protocol, and contributed to the writing of the paper. A Northcutt and G Dukes supervised the study. D McSorley and S Kong did statistical analyses. Investigators (USA) G Anderson (Community Research Management Associates, Cincinnati, OH), R D Baerg (Tacoma, WA), J O Bauer (Diagnostic Clinic Of San Antonio, TX), C K Bedard (Minors and James Medical, Seattle, WA), R L Bell (Mobile, AL), R W Bennetts (Portland, OR), W R Berry (Longmont, CO), S D Bleser (Midwest Regional Research, Bellbrook, OH), B B Borkar (Louisville, KY), M L Brandon (California Research Foundation, San Diego, CA), E J Burbige (East Bay Clinical Trial Center, Concord, CA), L Cain (Partner's Clinical Research Center, Asheville, NC), J R Caldwell (Gainesville Clinical Research Center, Gainesville, FL), B Cameron (University Hospitals of Cleveland, Cleveland, OH), C Casale (Hygeia Research Associates, West Hampton Beach, NY), A-Y Chen (Monroe Clinic, Monroe, WI), Y Cheng (Loma Linda University Medical Center, Gastroenterology Division, Loma Linda, CA), W Y Chey (University of Rochester Medical Center, NY), S A Cohen (Gastroenterology Associates, Stratford, CT), C Colip (Portland, OR), D W Collins (Western States Clinical Research, Arvada, CO), G V Collins (Charlotte Clinical Research, Charlotte, NC), J Conrad (Grandview Medical Research, Sellersville, PA), R Croitoru (Nampa, ID), B L Cryer (Dallas VA Medical Center, Dallas, TX), C H DeBusk (New Tazewell, TN), M G DeLissio (Cary Gastroenterology Associates, Cary, NC), B J Dolin (Health Advance Institute, Peoria, IL), E J Eaker (Kansas University Medical Center, Division of Gastroenterology, Kansas City, KS), J K Earl (Unifour Medical Research, Hickory, NC), W Ellison (MedQuest, Centers for Clinical Research, Greer, SC), M F Elmore (Indianapolis Gastroenterology Research Foundation, IN), S Faruqui (Baton Rouge, LA), R Fass (Tucson VA Medical Center, Section of Gastroenterology (IIIG-1), AZ), J Fidelholtz (Hightop Medical Research Center, Cincinnati, OH), D D Fitch (Triangle East Gasgroenterology, PA, Wilson, NC), R Free (SciRex Corporation, Hartford, CT), W N Gaman (North Texas Clinical Research, Irving, TX), M Gelfant (Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, WA), M Goldhamer (San Diego, CA), M Gorsky (Beavercreek, OH), J F Gray (Reno, NV), A Green (Crucible Group, Atlanta, GA), D Gremillion (Nashville Research Associates, TN), J J Gringeri (Atlantic Clinical Research, Inc., Newtown, PA), P Hall (Medical Research Consortium, Indianapolis, IN), C Hanshaw (Dayton, OH), H F Harris (Oakridge Medical Center, Lake Oswego, OR), W H Holderman (Digestive Health Specialists, Allenmore Medical Center, Tacoma, WA), R Holmes (Piedmont Medical Research Associates, Winston-Salem, NC), P Jaffe (Clinical Research Unit, Tucson, AZ), D S James (Osteopathic Gastroenterology, Tulsa, OK), D A Johnson (Norfolk, VA), R B Johnson (Sharp Rees-Stealy Medical Center, San Diego, CA), B A Jones (Cedarwood Medical Center, St Joseph, MI), R Kamyar (Institute of Health Care Assessment, La Mesa, CA), H M Kenney (Spokane, WA), C W Kessler (Primary Care Research Center, Annandale, VA), G Koval (West Hills Gastroenterology, Portland, OR), M D Kurtz (Research Across America, Oceanside, CA), R D Lerner (Mobile Infirmary Medical Center, Division of Clinical Research, Mobile, AL), M S Levine (Marietta, GA), J H Lewis (Georgetown Hospital, Division of Gastroenterology, Washington, DC), R Lindenberg (Torrington, CT), J Linne (Community Research Management Associates, Cincinnati, OH), T A Loludice (Akron Gastroenterology Associates, Akron, OH), M E Mailliard (Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Internal Medicine, Lubbock, TX), D C McCluskey (Hill Top Research, Ltd., Mogadore, OH), T J McDonald (Guthrie Clinic Clinical Research, Sayre, PA), D J Miller (Morrisville, PA), P Moses (South Burlington, VT), L P Murray (Hill Top Research, St Petersburg, FL), J K Nelson (Bountiful, UT), T W Nichols (Center for Nutrition and Digestive Disorders, Hanover, PA), M Opipari (Horizon Center for Clinical Research, Warren, MI), A Plotner (Lansdowne, VA), B H Plotnick (Rush North Shore Professional Center, Skokie, IL), R S Powell (West Florida Clinical Research Center, Pensacola, FL), J Prabakaran (Ft Myers, FL), T J Pulliam (PW Clinical Research, LLC, Winston-Salem, NC), J-P Raufman (University of Arkansas Medical School, Little Rock, AR), P Raymond (Norfolk, VA), S Reddy (Xavier University College of Pharmacy, Clinical Trials Unit, New Orleans, LA), L R Rocamore (Carolina Clinical Research, Winston-Salem, NC), F B Rosenberg (North Shore Endoscopy Center, Lake Bluff, IL), M Rosenberg (Research Foundation of America, Los Angeles, CA), T I Rosenfield (Hill Top Research, Pharmaceutical Clinical Trials Division, West Palm Beach, FL), S Sabesin (Chicago, IL). D J Sales (Northwest Gastroenterologists, SC, Arlington Heights, IL), M D Schiff (Gastroenterology Associates, St Augustine, FL), S C Schindler (Central Kentucky Research, Lexington, KY), P Schow (Boise, ID), D Schumacher (Hill Top Research, Columbus, OH), C Scowroft (Anderson, SC), C J Sigmund, Jr (St Louis Center for Clinical Research, St Louis, MO), A L Silverman (William Beaumont Hospital, Gastroenterology and Hepatology Research, Royal Oak, MI), D R Silvers (Metairie, LA), W B smith (New Orleans, LA), W H Sobin (Kenosha, WI), R Soloway (University of Texas Medical, Gastroenterology Division, Galveston, TX), J Sorokin (Marlton, NJ), M Beth Spanarkel (Regional Gastroenterology Associates, Durham, NC), R S Sprague (First Coast Medical Group, Jacksonville, FL), A Srivastava (MacNeal Center for Clinical Research, Berwyn, IL), M Statiem (Cary Primary Care, PA, Cary, NC), B E Stein (ICHOR Clinical Research, Manchester, CT), W Stern (Rockville, MD), M L Throne (Atlanta, GA), J D Torosis (Peninsula GI Medical Group, Redwood City, CA), S Tougher (Hill Top Research, Birmingham, AL), J Wagner (Northwest Gastroenterology, Bellevue, WA), J Walker (Pacific Coast Clinical Coordinators, Medford, OR), S J Wegley (Seattle Gastroenterology Associates, WA), G Weisman (Warminster, PA), C Wiesenhutter (Coeur d'Alene Arthritis Clinic, Coeur D'Alene, ID), F Wilson (Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC), G D Wolfley (Hill Top Research, Scottsdale, AZ), J D Wolosin (Regional Research Institute, Jackson, TN), R A Wright (University of Louisville, Louisville, KY). Acknowledgments We thank Patrice Ferriola (Glaxo Wellcome) for assistance with writing and editing. Glaxo Wellcome Research and Development provided funding for this study.
PY - 2000/3/25
Y1 - 2000/3/25
N2 - Background. Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a common gastrointestinal disorder with symptoms of abdominal pain, discomfort, and altered bowel function. Antagonists of the type 3 serotonin receptor (5-HT3) have shown promising results in the relief of IBS-associated symptoms. We aimed to confirm these findings by doing a randomised, placebo-controlled trial. Methods. We studied 647 female IBS patients with diarrhoea-predominant or alternating bowel patterns (diarrhoea and constipation). 324 patients were assigned 1 mg alosetron and 323 placebo orally twice daily for 12 weeks, followed by a 4-week post-treatment period. Adequate relief of abdominal pain and discomfort was the primary endpoint; secondary endpoints included improvements in urgency, stool frequency, and stool consistency. Analysis was by intention to treat. Findings. 79 (24%) of patients in the alosetron group and 53 (16%) in the placebo group dropped out. The difference in the drop-out rate between groups was mainly due to a greater occurrence of constipation in the alosetron group. A greater proportion of alosetron-treated patients than placebo-treated patients (133 [41%] vs 94 [29%], respectively) reported adequate relief for all 3 months of treatment (difference 12% [4.7-19.2]). Alosetron also significantly decreased urgency and stool frequency, and increased stool firmness. Constipation occurred in 30% and 3% of patients in the alosetron and placebo groups, respectively. Interpretation. Alosetron was well tolerated and clinically effective in alleviating pain and bowel-related symptoms in this population of women with IBS.
AB - Background. Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a common gastrointestinal disorder with symptoms of abdominal pain, discomfort, and altered bowel function. Antagonists of the type 3 serotonin receptor (5-HT3) have shown promising results in the relief of IBS-associated symptoms. We aimed to confirm these findings by doing a randomised, placebo-controlled trial. Methods. We studied 647 female IBS patients with diarrhoea-predominant or alternating bowel patterns (diarrhoea and constipation). 324 patients were assigned 1 mg alosetron and 323 placebo orally twice daily for 12 weeks, followed by a 4-week post-treatment period. Adequate relief of abdominal pain and discomfort was the primary endpoint; secondary endpoints included improvements in urgency, stool frequency, and stool consistency. Analysis was by intention to treat. Findings. 79 (24%) of patients in the alosetron group and 53 (16%) in the placebo group dropped out. The difference in the drop-out rate between groups was mainly due to a greater occurrence of constipation in the alosetron group. A greater proportion of alosetron-treated patients than placebo-treated patients (133 [41%] vs 94 [29%], respectively) reported adequate relief for all 3 months of treatment (difference 12% [4.7-19.2]). Alosetron also significantly decreased urgency and stool frequency, and increased stool firmness. Constipation occurred in 30% and 3% of patients in the alosetron and placebo groups, respectively. Interpretation. Alosetron was well tolerated and clinically effective in alleviating pain and bowel-related symptoms in this population of women with IBS.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0034712539&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0034712539&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02033-X
DO - 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02033-X
M3 - Article
C2 - 10744088
AN - SCOPUS:0034712539
SN - 0140-6736
VL - 355
SP - 1035
EP - 1040
JO - Lancet
JF - Lancet
IS - 9209
ER -