Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2006 Jan 15;23(2):303-12.

Budesonide foam versus budesonide enema in active ulcerative proctitis and proctosigmoiditis.

Author information

1
Hospital St. Marien, Amberg, Germany. gross.volker@klinikum-amberg.de

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Rectal budesonide is an effective treatment of active ulcerative proctitis or proctosigmoiditis.

AIM:

To compare the therapeutic efficacy, tolerability and safety, and patient's preference of budesonide foam vs. budesonide enema.

METHODS:

Patients with active ulcerative proctitis or proctosigmoiditis (clinical activity index > 4 and endoscopic index > or = 4) were eligible for this double-blind, double-dummy, randomized, multicentre study. They received 2 mg/25 mL budesonide foam and placebo enema (n = 265), or 2 mg/100 mL budesonide enema and placebo foam (n = 268) for 4 weeks. Primary endpoint was clinical remission (clinical activity index < or = 4) at the final/withdrawal visit (per protocol).

RESULTS:

A total of 541 patients were randomized--533 were evaluable for intention-to-treat analysis and 449 for per protocol analysis. Clinical remission rates (per protocol) were 60% for budesonide foam and 66% for budesonide enema (P = 0.02362 for non-inferiority of foam vs. enema within a predefined non-inferiority margin of 15%). Both formulations were safe and no drug-related serious adverse events were observed. Because of better tolerability and easier application most patients preferred foam (84%).

CONCLUSION:

Budesonide foam is as effective as budesonide enema in the treatment of active ulcerative proctitis or proctosigmoiditis. Both budesonide formulations are safe, and most patients prefer foam.

[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free full text

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wiley
Loading ...
Support Center