Digestive and liver disease : official journal of the Italian Society of Gastroenterology and the Italian Association for the Study of the Liver · 2008
Intensive granulocyte and monocyte adsorption versus intravenous prednisolone in patients with severe ulcerative colitis: an unblinded randomised multi-centre controlled study.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hanai H, Iida T, Takeuchi K, Watanabe F, Maruyama Y, Kageoka M, Ikeya K, Yamada M, Kikuyama M, Iwaoka Y, Hirayama K, Nagata S, Sato Y, Hosoda Y
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Several uncontrolled studies have reported on the efficacy of adsorptive depletion of peripheral blood granulocytes and monocytes/macrophages (GM) in patients with moderate or severe ulcerative colitis. This study was to compare the efficacy and safety of intensive GMA with intensive intravenous prednisolone in patients with severe ulcerative colitis.
METHODS: Seventy patients with clinical activity index 10-23 were randomly assigned to intensive GMA with the Adacolumn, at 2 sessions/week in the first 3 weeks and then 1 session/week for up to 11 sessions (n = 35) or intravenous prednisolone, 40-60 mg/day for 5-10 days (n = 35). No patient received immunomodulators within 8 weeks prior to entry. Clinical response based on intention to treat was assessed at weeks 2, 6 and 12.
RESULTS: Four patients in the prednisolone group and two patients in the GMA group discontinued in week 1. At weeks 2, 6 and 12, the remission (clinical activity index < or = 4) rates (%) in the GMA group were 17.1, 54.4, 74.3, respectively. The corresponding values in the prednisolone group were 25.7, 51.4 and 48.6. Further, at week 12, 27 patients (77%) in the GMA group and 5 patients (14%) in the prednisolone group were steroid free (P = 0.0076). In the GMA group, flushing and light-headedness were observed in 5 patients versus typical steroid side effects in 29 patients of the prednisolone group.
CONCLUSIONS: In this clinical response to GMA was comparable or better than prednisolone. Further, the response to GMA was slower than to intravenous prednisolone, but was more sustainable than the latter.
METHODS: Seventy patients with clinical activity index 10-23 were randomly assigned to intensive GMA with the Adacolumn, at 2 sessions/week in the first 3 weeks and then 1 session/week for up to 11 sessions (n = 35) or intravenous prednisolone, 40-60 mg/day for 5-10 days (n = 35). No patient received immunomodulators within 8 weeks prior to entry. Clinical response based on intention to treat was assessed at weeks 2, 6 and 12.
RESULTS: Four patients in the prednisolone group and two patients in the GMA group discontinued in week 1. At weeks 2, 6 and 12, the remission (clinical activity index < or = 4) rates (%) in the GMA group were 17.1, 54.4, 74.3, respectively. The corresponding values in the prednisolone group were 25.7, 51.4 and 48.6. Further, at week 12, 27 patients (77%) in the GMA group and 5 patients (14%) in the prednisolone group were steroid free (P = 0.0076). In the GMA group, flushing and light-headedness were observed in 5 patients versus typical steroid side effects in 29 patients of the prednisolone group.
CONCLUSIONS: In this clinical response to GMA was comparable or better than prednisolone. Further, the response to GMA was slower than to intravenous prednisolone, but was more sustainable than the latter.