Background: Mesalazine as maintenance therapy in ulcerative colitis is used worldwide and has been proven to be effective. However, the optimal dosage remains to be defined. Aim: To establish whether daily treatment with 2.4 g of oral mesalazine is more effective than 1.2 g in preventing disease relapse. Methods: A total of 156 patients with ulcerative colitis in remission were randomly treated for 1 year with 2.4 (n = 80) or 1.2 (n = 76) g/day of mesalazine. Activity of disease was assessed by periodical clinical, endoscopic and histological examinations. Results: After 12 months, 24 of 80 patients (30%) on 2.4 g and 20 of 76 patients (26%) on 1.2 g were still in remission (P = N.S.). Patients in 2.4 g group remained in remission for a longer time than those in 1.2 g group (P < 0.001). Among clinical variables considered in the study, course of disease prior to enrolment (<= 3/> 3 relapses/year) was found to influence response to therapy. Conclusions: A daily dosage of 2.4 g of oral mesalazine seems to better at preventing and delaying relapses of ulcerative colitis than 1.2 g. The course of disease seems to be crucial in choosing the optimal dosage of mesalazine in a maintenance regimen.

Comparison of two different daily dosages (2.4 vs. 1.2 g) of oral mesalazine in maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis patients: 1-year follow-up study / O. A., Paoluzi; Federico, Iacopini; R., Pica; Crispino, Pietro; Marcheggiano, Adriana; Consolazio, Adriana; Rivera, Margherita; Paoluzi, Paolo. - In: ALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS. - ISSN 0269-2813. - STAMPA. - 21:9(2005), pp. 1111-1119. [10.1111/j.1365-2036.2005.02458.x]

Comparison of two different daily dosages (2.4 vs. 1.2 g) of oral mesalazine in maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis patients: 1-year follow-up study

CRISPINO, PIETRO;MARCHEGGIANO, ADRIANA;CONSOLAZIO, Adriana;RIVERA, Margherita;PAOLUZI, Paolo
2005

Abstract

Background: Mesalazine as maintenance therapy in ulcerative colitis is used worldwide and has been proven to be effective. However, the optimal dosage remains to be defined. Aim: To establish whether daily treatment with 2.4 g of oral mesalazine is more effective than 1.2 g in preventing disease relapse. Methods: A total of 156 patients with ulcerative colitis in remission were randomly treated for 1 year with 2.4 (n = 80) or 1.2 (n = 76) g/day of mesalazine. Activity of disease was assessed by periodical clinical, endoscopic and histological examinations. Results: After 12 months, 24 of 80 patients (30%) on 2.4 g and 20 of 76 patients (26%) on 1.2 g were still in remission (P = N.S.). Patients in 2.4 g group remained in remission for a longer time than those in 1.2 g group (P < 0.001). Among clinical variables considered in the study, course of disease prior to enrolment (<= 3/> 3 relapses/year) was found to influence response to therapy. Conclusions: A daily dosage of 2.4 g of oral mesalazine seems to better at preventing and delaying relapses of ulcerative colitis than 1.2 g. The course of disease seems to be crucial in choosing the optimal dosage of mesalazine in a maintenance regimen.
2005
01 Pubblicazione su rivista::01a Articolo in rivista
Comparison of two different daily dosages (2.4 vs. 1.2 g) of oral mesalazine in maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis patients: 1-year follow-up study / O. A., Paoluzi; Federico, Iacopini; R., Pica; Crispino, Pietro; Marcheggiano, Adriana; Consolazio, Adriana; Rivera, Margherita; Paoluzi, Paolo. - In: ALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS. - ISSN 0269-2813. - STAMPA. - 21:9(2005), pp. 1111-1119. [10.1111/j.1365-2036.2005.02458.x]
File allegati a questo prodotto
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11573/233777
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 16
  • Scopus 72
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 62
social impact