Nocturnal and Urgent Defecation are Improved by Budesonide Foam in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis: a retrospective observational study

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1429634/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Nocturnal and Urgent Defecation are Improved by Budesonide Foam in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis: a retrospective observational study

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1429634/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

You are reading this latest preprint version

Introduction: Patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) are known to have a significantly poor quality of life due to urgent and nocturnal defecation. Budesonide foam is a topical medication that was approved in Japan in 2017 for the treatment of UC. However, its efficacy in the treatment of urgent or nocturnal defecation is unknown. This study aimed to explore the efficacy of budesonide foam for the alleviation of these symptoms.

Methods: UC patients who received budesonide foam between December 2017 and January 2020 at the Jikei University School of Medicine in Tokyo were enrolled. The simple clinical colitis activity index (SCCAI) was evaluated at the start of budesonide foam treatment and 2 and 6 weeks later in patients who initially scored ≥ 1 for urgent and nocturnal defecation, respectively. We also studied the effect of budesonide foam on remaining symptoms in patients who had used 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) topical treatment, those with SCCAI ≥ 3, and those in remission with residual symptoms (SCCAI 1 or 2).

Results: Of the 233 enrolled patients, 102 were eligible for the study. In 36 patients with nocturnal defecation treated with budesonide foam were significantly effective, score in SCCAI decreased from 1.17 ± 0.45 at baseline to 0.53 ± 0.61 at week 2 (p < 0.0001) and 0.17 ± 0.38 at week 6 (p < 0.0001). In 45 patients with urgent defecation score in SCCAI decreased significantly from 1.33 ± 0.52 at baseline to 0.44 ± 0.59 at week 2 (p < 0.0001) and 0.22 ± 0.40 at week 6 (p < 0.0001). Of 22 patients who switched from topical 5-ASA administration to budesonide foam, nine at week 2 (41%) and 11 (50%) at week 6 were improved with no symptoms, and there were no cases of worsened symptoms. No severe side effects associated with budesonide foam were observed.

Conclusion: Budesonide foam administration significantly improves both nocturnal and urgent defecation-related UC activity and is also effective for the patients who were refractory to topical 5-ASA administration.

budesonide foam

nocturnal defecation

urgent defecation

5-ASA topical treatment

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is an inflammatory bowel disease caused by diffuse inflammation of the colonic mucosa with erosions or ulcers; the pathogenesis is still unknown. Inflammation starts from the rectum and extends to the entire large intestine. The major symptoms of UC are diarrhea, bloody stools, abdominal pain [1–3], urgent and nocturnal defecation. Urgent defecation has been identified as an important symptom in many studies [4–7], is emphasized in the United States guidelines, and is used as a success index for diagnosis and treatment [8]. An online survey of Japanese UC patients confirmed that urgent defecation correlates with a decrease in the patient's quality of life (QOL) [4]. Although there are only a few reports of nocturnal defecation caused by UC, this symptom induces sleep disturbance and significantly reduces QOL [9–10]. Since these symptoms are directly related to the quality of life, it is essential to alleviate them immediately as persistent chronic inflammation can increase the risk of colorectal cancer and should be treated appropriately.

Oral 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) preparations are used to treat mild to moderate UC. Still, often the dose is not sufficient to reach the distal colon and rectum, resulting in residual rectal and sigmoid colonic inflammation and their related symptoms [11–12]. In such cases, 5-ASA topical treatments such as enema or suppositories are useful for distal residual inflammation [13–14]. Topical therapy consisting of 5-ASA or steroid suppositories and enemas can be used in combination with orally administered drugs [15–17]. Budesonide foam approved in Japan in 2017 can be highly effective by spraying a sufficient amount of the drug on the distal colon [18–20]. For six weeks, the phase III study performed in Japan showed that budesonide foam improved rectal bleeding sub-scores and endoscopic scores and induced remission [21]. However, there have been no studies on the effect of budesonide foam on urgency and nocturnal defecation, which are directly linked to the QOL. Budesonide foam was significantly effective in the studies compared with topical 5-ASA [20, 22]; on the contrary, comparison studies with topical 5-ASA primarily focusing on the prolonged clinical symptoms have not been performed.

Therefore, this study aimed to examine the efficacy of budesonide foam for treating urgency and nocturnal defecation in UC patients and its effectiveness when switched to inpatients that showed lower efficiency with topical 5-ASA administration.

A retrospective study was conducted at the Jikei University School of Medicine in Tokyo. We investigated the electronic medical records of 233 patients with UC who started budesonide foam treatment between December 2017 and January 2020 at our hospital. We obtained information on the patient background (sex, age, disease type, and duration of illness), Mayo endoscopic sub-score before budesonide foam administration, coexisting treatments, and overall scores for each item of the Simple Clinical Colitis Activity Index (SCCAI) for UC before and 2 and 6 weeks after budesonide foam administration. We also noted the presence and type of adverse events during this study. Patients whose symptoms could not be quantified 2 and 6 weeks after the start of budesonide foam and patients who were administered a new induction drug during this period were excluded from the study.

We studied the presence or absence of changes in the scores of nocturnal and urgent defecation, which are sub-items of the SCCAI, at weeks 2 and 6 after budesonide foam administration. We also studied the presence or absence of changes in the SCCAI score at baseline, week 2, and week 6 after changing to budesonide foam to improve symptoms in UC patients who had prolonged symptoms and had used topical 5-ASA administration for more than four weeks. Similarly, the efficacy rate (induction rate of remission) at weeks 2 and 6 after administration was studied for patients with active UC treated with budesonide foam. Finally, we investigated the symptom disappearance rate by budesonide foam at weeks 2 and 6 in patients in clinical remission at baseline but had residual symptoms (SCCAI 1 or 2). SCCAI 0, ≤ 2, and ≥ 3 were defined as complete clinical remission, clinical remission, and active UC, respectively.

Statistical methods

The comparison of SCCAI scores and sub-items of SCCAI before and after the budesonide foam administration were analyzed using the Wilcoxon signed rank-sum test. The McNemar test was performed to compare the improvement and remission rates in each SCCAI evaluation period. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation or median with interquartile range. SPSS and STATA version 15 were used for statistical analysis.

Patient characteristics

Of the 233 patients with UC who started budesonide foam administration, 102 were eligible for the study shown in Fig. 1. The patient backgrounds are shown in Table 1. The average age of the patients was 42.8 ± 14.2 years, and there were 38 males and 64 females. Pancolitis occurred in 49 cases (48%), left-sided colitis in 37 cases (36%), and proctitis in 16 cases (16%).

Table 1

Baseline demographics and clinical parameters.
Variable	Category
Age, mean		42.8 ± 14.2
Sex, n (%)	Female	64 (62.7)
	Male	38 (37.3)
Disease type, n (%)	Pancolitis	48 (47.1)
	Left-sided colitis	37 (36.3)
	Proctitis	15 (14.7)
	(Distal type)	40 (39.2)
Mayo endoscopic subscore, n (%)	Score 0	15 (14.7)
	Score 1	43 (42.2)
	Score 2	29 (28.4)
	Score 3	5 (4.9)
SCCAI, n (%)	Score 0	3 (2.9)
	Score 1–2	29 (28.4)
	Score ≥ 3	70 (68.6)
SCCAI, mean	0 week	4.0 ± 2.6
	2 weeks	1.9 ± 2.0
	6 weeks	1.1 ± 1.7
Nocturnal defecation score, n (%)		36 (35.3)
Defecation urgency score, n (%)		45 (44.1)
Concomitant drug, n (%)	5-ASA suppositories	22 (21.5)
	5-ASA enemas	3 (2.9)
	Prednisolone suppositories	1 (1.0)
	Prednisolone enemas	6 (5.8)
Immunomodulators, n (%)		11 (10.7)
Biologics, n (%)	IFX	5 (4.9)
	GLM	3 (2.9)
	ADA	2 (1.9)
	VDZ	1 (1.0)
CRP at start of the observation, mean		0.8 ± 1.6 mg/dl

Treatment efficacy of budesonide foam of UC patients with nocturnal/urgency defecation

The mean SCCAI score decreased significantly from 4.01 ± 2.66 at baseline to 1.86 ± 2.03 at week 2 and 1.10 ± 1.76 at week 6 shown in Fig. 2. In 36 of the 102 eligible subjects with nocturnal defecation score in SCCAI decreased significantly from 1.17 ± 0.45 at baseline to 0.53 ± 0.61 (p < 0.0001) at week 2 and 0.17 ± 0.38 at week 6 (p < 0.0001) shown in Fig. 3. In 45 cases with urgent defecation score in SCCAI decreased significantly from 1.33 ± 0.52 at baseline to 0.44 ± 0.59 at week 2 (p < 0.0001) and 0.22 ± 0.40 at week 6 (p < 0.0001) shown in Fig. 4. There were no cases of worsening score during this study period.

Clinical benefits of UC patients that switched to budesonide foam from topical 5-ASA preparation

Of the 22 patients who switched from topical 5-ASA preparation to budesonide foam to improve symptoms, 12 patients (SCCAI ≥ 3) were included due to unsuccessful induction treatments of remission. The remaining ten patients (SCCAI 1 or 2) were in clinical remission score but had residual clinical symptoms. The number of patients without any symptoms significantly increased at week 2 (n = 9, 41%, p < 0.0001) and week 6 (n = 11, 50%, p < 0.0001) shown in Fig. 5.

Clinical improvement of budesonide foam in patients with active UC (SCCAI ≥ 3)

Seventy of the 102 target patients exhibited UC clinical activity (SCCAI ≥ 3) at the start of budesonide foam. Of these patients, 63% (n = 44) achieved clinical remission (SCCAI ≤ 2) at week 2 and 79% (n = 55) at week 6 shown in Fig. 6.

Clinical efficacy of budesonide foam for UC patients with residual clinical symptoms even in the remission score (SCCAI 1 or 2)

Of the 29 patients who had residual symptoms even in clinical remission (SCCAI 1 or 2) at baseline, 55% (n = 16) had complete disappearance (SCCAI 0) of symptoms at week 2 and 72% (n = 21) at week 6 shown in Fig. 7. Among these, three patients underwent colonoscopy both before and after budesonide foam administration, and all three patients were induced to mucosal healing with mayo endoscopic subscore 0 shown in Fig. 8.

Reports of adverse events of budesonide administration

No adverse events were seen in any subject during this study.

This study is the first paper on the budesonide foam rapidly improves the most prominent UC symptoms, such as urgency and nocturnal defecation. According to previous reports about factors influencing the QOL of UC patients in Japan, the daily life of 43.5% of these patients was "significantly affected" by UC symptoms [4]. Similarly, nocturnal defecation is also closely related to the QOL of UC patients. It has been suggested that the frequency of stools and rectal bleeding should not be considered alone in determining the QOL of these patients [910]. Furthermore, the QOL was not investigated in detail in the study; we confirmed that urgent defecation and nocturnal defecation improved significantly at week 2 after budesonide foam administration, indicating that the QOL was also improved.

Our findings confirm the use of budesonide foam as an excellent alternative treatment that can significantly improve the quality of life in UC patients. In UC, inflammation occurs from the rectum just above the anus; therefore, eliminating rectal inflammation is crucial for the complete disappearance of symptoms. In the initial treatment of UC, 5-ASA preparations are usually administered regardless of disease type to induce remission, but there may be minor residual inflammation and symptoms. Our results show that budesonide foam can also eliminate residual inflammation in such cases. Half of the patients utilizing a 5-ASA topical preparation was ineffective, but when substituted with budesonide foam, the symptoms disappeared in 6 weeks, and no worsening cases were observed. Thus, if 5-ASA topical preparations do not induce remission, budesonide foam could be a viable treatment option before systemic steroid administration.

Improvement of the rectal bleeding and urgent defecation two weeks after budesonide foam administration is associated with complete mucosal remission six weeks after treatment [23, 24]. However, only the rectal bleeding and urgent defecation were evaluated, and the response rates for all other clinical symptom scores were unclear; similar results were obtained in the present study. Moreover, the remission rate increased by 16% at week 6 compared to week 2. Thus, even if remission is not achieved at week 2 after budesonide foam administration, it is better to continue the treatment until week 6.

UC patients in clinical remission with a residual SCCAI symptom score of 1 or 2 are commonly observed in routine clinical practice. This study revealed that budesonide foam was effective even for mild residual symptoms such as urgent defecation, mild rectal bleeding, and nocturnal defecations. There are no research reports that present a correlation between SCCAI scores ≤ 2 and QOL. However, these symptoms do have the potential to affect the QOL of patients with UC. The high rate of symptom alleviation observed in our study (more than 50% of the patients at 2 weeks and 70% at 6 weeks) suggests that this formulation is highly beneficial for improving the QOL of these patients. Even though budesonide foam is easier to use than conventional topical preparations, the difficulty of inserting budesonide foam twice a day is a disadvantage for the patient's QOL. Nevertheless, considering that the symptoms can be improved by using budesonide foam for a certain period, it is considered that the overall merit of its use is higher than non-use.

No noticeable side effects were reported in any of the cases in this study. Also, serum cortisol values were not measured in this study, and there was no change in the cortisol value in a previous report [25]. Thus, budesonide foam can be selected as an optional treatment without any safety concerns.

The main limitation of this study is that it was a single-center, retrospective study. In particular, the use of budesonide foam was not based on specific criteria and rather reflects the intentions of the attending physician or patient; thus, selection bias was not excluded. Second, the SCCAI is not a definite objective evaluation index because it is easy for patients to have their own subjective feelings about their symptoms. However, improvement was seen with the SCCAI before and after treatment in the same patient; hence, a certain degree of objectivity was achieved. Additionally, a few patients who received new treatment during the six weeks were excluded from the study, and it is possible that budesonide foam was not effective in those patients. Finally, the adherence rate of budesonide foam administration is uncertain because it was not confirmed the administration rate of the prescribed medication.

Budesonide foam significantly improves the scores of nocturnal defecation and urgent defecation among patients with UC symptoms. It is also effective in refractory cases changed from a 5-ASA preparation and has the ability to induce instant remission. Furthermore, the remission rate was higher at week 6 than that of week 2 after budesonide foam administration, indicating the need to continue for six weeks.

i) Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was approved by the Jikei Hospital Ethics Committee (No. 32-2729771) to use opt out method and was conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Declaration of Helsinki.

ii) Consent for publication

This is a retrospective study and participants were informed of the opportunity to opt out through our website. This manuscript is not applicable to the declaration of the consent for publication statement, for it does not have any information or images that could lead to identification of a study participant.

iii) Availability of Data and Material (ADM)

All data needed to evaluate the conclusions in the paper are presented in the paper. Additional data related to this paper may be requested from the authors.

iv) Competing interests

The authors have no conflicts of interest related to this article.

v) Funding

There is no funding or sponsorship for this study.

vi) Authors' contributions

Miyazaki R and Sakurai T designed the study; Miyazaki R wrote the manuscript and reviewed patients’ cross-sectional images; Miyazaki R and Shibuya N made critical revisions; Maruyama Y, Miyashita H, Iwashita Y, Shimada M and Akita Y interpreted and analyzed data; Saruta M made substantial contributions to conception, design and coordination of the study and gave final approval of the version to be published. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

vii) Acknowledgment　

Not applicable.

Rogler G. Medical management of ulcerative colitis. Dig Dis. 2009;27:542–49.
Frei P, Biedermann L, Manser CN, et al. Topical therapies in inflammatory bowel disease. Digestion. 2012;86(Suppl 1):36–44.
Ko CW, Singh S, Feuerstein JD, et al. AGA clinical practice guidelines on the management of mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology. 2019;156:748–764.
Hibi T, Ishibashi T, Kobayashi T, et al. Ulcerative colitis: disease burden, impact on daily life, and reluctance to consult medical professionals: results from a Japanese internet survey. Inflamm Intest Dis. 2020;5:27-35.
Pawel P, Leszek P. Stool patterns and symptoms of disordered anorectal function in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases. Adv Clin Exp Med. 2018;27(6):813-8.
Norton C, Dibley LB, Bassett P. Faecal incontinence in inflammatory bowel disease: Associations and effect on quality of life. J Crohn’s Colitis. 2013;7:e302-11.
Proudfoot H, Norton C, Artom M, et al. Targets for interventions for faecal incontinence in inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic review. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2018;53(12):1476-83.
Rubin DT, Ananthakrishnan AN, Siegel CA, et al. ACG Clinical Guideline: Ulcerative Colitis in Adults. Am J Gastroenterol. 2019;114(3):384-413.
Rasmussen B, Haastrup P, Wehberg S, et al.: Predictors of health-related quality of life in patients with moderate to severely active ulcerative colitis receiving biological therapy. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2020;55(6):656-63.
Peyrin-Biroulet L, Van Assche G, Sturm A, et al. Treatment satisfaction, preferences and perception gaps between patients and physicians ion the ulcerative colitis CARES study: a real world-based study. Digest Liver Dis. 2016;48(6):601-7.
G Poroo, S Ardizzone, V Imbesi, et al. Low Pentasa dosage versus hydrocortisone in the topical treatment of active ulcerative colitis: a randomized, double-blind study. Am J Gastroenterol. 1995;90:736-9.
Kam L, Cohen H, Orchard J, et al. A comparison of mesalamine suspension enema and oral sulfasalazine for treatment of active distal ulcerative colitis in adults. Am J Gastroenterol. 1996;91(7):1338-42.
Naganuma M, Iwao Y, Hibi T, et al. Measurement of colonic mucosal concentrations of 5-aminosalicylic acid is useful for estimating its therapeutic efficacy in distal ulcerative colitis: comparison of orally administered mesalamine and sulfasalazine. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2001;7(3):221-5.
Ford AC, Khan KJ, JAchkar J-P, et al. Efficacy of oral vs. topical, or combined oral and topical 5-aminosalicylates, in ulcerative colitis: systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2012;107(2):167-76.
Safdi M, DeMicco M, Wiita B, et al. A double-blind comparison of oral versus rectal mesalamine versus combination therapy in the treatment of distal ulcerative colitis. Am J Gastroenterol. 1997;92(10):1867-71.
Marteau P, Probert CS, Foldager M, et al. Combined oral and enema treatment with Pentasa (mesalazine) is superior to oral therapy alone in patients with extensive mild/moderate active ulcerative colitis: a randomised, double blind, placebo controlled study. Gut. 2005;54:960-5.
d'AlbasioG, Pacini F, Amorosi A, et al. Combined therapy with 5-aminosalicylic acid tablets and enemas for maintaining remission in ulcerative colitis: a randomized double-blind study. Am J Gastroenterol. 1997;92(7):1143-7.
Gionchetti P, Amadini C, Rizzello F, et al. Review article: treatment of mild to moderate ulcerative colitis and pouchitis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2002;16(Suppl 4):13–9.
Hibi T, Naganuma M, Oda E, et al. Predictive factors for achievement of mucosal healing by budesonide 2-mg form in ulcerative colitis: a pooled analysis of data from two clinical trials. Intest Res. 2020;18(1):56-68.
Hartmann F, Stein J. Clinical trial: controlled, open, randomized multicentre study comparing the effects of treatment on quality of life, safety and efficacy of budesonide or mesalazine enemas in active left-sided ulcerative colitis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2010;32(3):368-76.
Zeng J, Lv L, Mei ZC. Budesonide foam for mild to moderate distal ulcerative colitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017;32(3):558-66.
Lemann M, Galian A, Modigliani R, et al. Comparison of budesonide and 5-aminosalicylic acid enemas in active distal ulcerative colitis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 1995;9(5):557-62.
Naganuma M, Aoyama N, Suzuki Y, et al. Twice-daily budesonide 2-mg foam induces complete mucosal healing in patients with distal ulcerative colitis. J Crohns Colitis. 2016;10(7):828-36.
Naganuma M, Aoyama N, Tada T, et al. Complete mucosal healing of distal lesions induced by twice-daily budesonide 2-mg foam promoted clinical remission of mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis with distal active inflammation: double-blind, randomized study. Gastroenterol. 2018;53(4):494-506.
Hammond A, Andus T, Gierend M, et al. Controlled, open, randomized multicenter trial comparing the effects of treatment on quality of life, safety and efficacy of budesonide foam and betamethasone enemas in patients with active distal ulcerative colitis. Hepatogastroenterology. 2004;51(59):1345-9.

No competing interests reported.

Download PDF

Editorial decision: Major revision
11 May, 2022
Reviews received at journal
06 May, 2022
Reviewers agreed at journal
25 Apr, 2022
Reviews received at journal
18 Apr, 2022
Reviewers agreed at journal
09 Apr, 2022
Reviewers invited by journal
08 Apr, 2022
Editor assigned by journal
08 Apr, 2022
Editor invited by journal
05 Apr, 2022
Submission checks completed at journal
05 Apr, 2022
First submitted to journal
08 Mar, 2022

You are reading this latest preprint version

Nocturnal and Urgent Defecation are Improved by Budesonide Foam in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis: a retrospective observational study

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Materials And Methods

Statistical methods

Results

Patient characteristics

Treatment efficacy of budesonide foam of UC patients with nocturnal/urgency defecation

Clinical benefits of UC patients that switched to budesonide foam from topical 5-ASA preparation

Clinical improvement of budesonide foam in patients with active UC (SCCAI ≥ 3)

Clinical efficacy of budesonide foam for UC patients with residual clinical symptoms even in the remission score (SCCAI 1 or 2)

Reports of adverse events of budesonide administration

Discussion

Conclusion

Declarations

i) Ethics approval and consent to participate

ii) Consent for publication

iii) Availability of Data and Material (ADM)

iv) Competing interests

v) Funding

vi) Authors' contributions

vii) Acknowledgment

References

Additional Declarations

Status:

Version 1