scholarly journals Systematic review of randomized controlled trials of probiotics, prebiotics, and synbiotics in inflammatory bowel disease

2014 ◽  
pp. 473 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew DuPont ◽  
Richards ◽  
Katherine A. Jelinek ◽  
Joseph Krill ◽  
Erik Rahimi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Inflammatory Bowel Disease ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Bowel Disease ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Inflammatory Bowel

scholarly journals Side Effects Associated with Probiotic Use in Adult Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Nutrients ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. 2913 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Pina Dore ◽  
Stefano Bibbò ◽  
Gianni Fresi ◽  
Gabrio Bassotti ◽  
Giovanni Mario Pes
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Inflammatory Bowel Disease ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Bowel Disease ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Adult Patients ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Inflammatory Bowel

Probiotics demonstrated to be effective in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, the safety profile of probiotics is insufficiently explored. In the present systematic review and meta-analysis, we examined the occurrence of side effects related to probiotic/synbiotic use in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of IBD patients as compared with placebo. Eligible RCTs in adult patients with IBD were identified by accessing the Medline database via PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL and the Cochrane central register of controlled trials up to December 2018. Occurrence of side effects was retrieved and recorded. Data were pooled and the relative risks (RRs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. The low-moderate study heterogeneity, assessed by the I2 statistic, allowed to use of a fixed-effects modelling for meta-analysis. Nine RCTs among 2337, including 826 patients (442 treated with probiotics/symbiotic and 384 with placebo) were analyzed. Eight were double-blind RCTs, and six enrolled ulcerative colitis (UC) patients. Although the risk for the overall side effects (RR 1.35, 95%CI 0.93–1.94; I2 = 25%) and for gastrointestinal symptoms (RR 1.78, 95%CI 0.99–3.20; I2 = 20%) was higher in IBD patients taking probiotics than in those exposed to placebo, statistical significance was achieved only for abdominal pain (RR 2.59, 95%CI 1.28–5.22; I2 = 40%). In conclusion, despite the small number of RCTs and the variety of probiotic used and schedule across studies, these findings highlight the level of research effort still required to identify the most appropriate use of probiotics in IBD.

scholarly journals Head-to-head comparison of biological drugs for inflammatory bowel disease: from randomized controlled trials to real-world experience

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 175628482110106
Author(s):  
Fabio Salvatore Macaluso ◽  
Marcello Maida ◽  
Mauro Grova ◽  
Federica Crispino ◽  
Giulia Teresi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Inflammatory Bowel Disease ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Real World ◽  
Bowel Disease ◽  
Quality Data ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Therapeutic Algorithms ◽  
Inflammatory Bowel

During past years, the increasing knowledge of molecular mechanisms of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have led to the development of several targeted biological therapies. This great expansion of available medical options has prompted the need for comparative data between drugs. For years, given that most randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were performed only versus placebo, this demand has clashed with the absence of head-to-head trials comparing two or more treatments. The quality of evidence coming from real-world experience was low overall, so it was extremely difficult to clarify the correct positioning of the biologicals inside the therapeutic algorithms for IBD. Fortunately, times are changing: head-to-head comparative RCTs have been conducted or are ongoing, and the methodological quality of real-world studies is gradually increasing, mainly thanks to a higher rate of application of statistical methods capable of reducing the selection bias, such as the propensity score. In this evolving scenario, the increasing number of comparative RCTs is providing high-quality data for a correct drug positioning in IBD. In parallel, real-world observational studies are supporting the data coming from RCTs, and covering those comparisons not performed in the RCT setting. We believe that there is moderate evidence already available to support clinicians in the correct choice between different biologicals, and data will certainly be more robust in the near future.

Challenges to the Design, Execution, and Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials for Inflammatory Bowel Disease

2012 ◽  
Vol 143 (6) ◽  
pp. 1461-1469 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geert D'Haens ◽  
Brian Feagan ◽  
Jean–Frédéric Colombel ◽  
William J. Sandborn ◽  
Walter Reinisch ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Inflammatory Bowel Disease ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Bowel Disease ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Inflammatory Bowel
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document