清畅栓诱导轻中度溃疡性直肠炎患者病情缓解:一项多中心、前瞻性、随机、平行对照临床试验。

Dai Xiaoling, Zhang Anming, Lin Hui, Shi Bei, Ren Yi, Wen Hongzhu, Fei Xiaoyan, Lin Jiang
{"title":"清畅栓诱导轻中度溃疡性直肠炎患者病情缓解:一项多中心、前瞻性、随机、平行对照临床试验。","authors":"Dai Xiaoling, Zhang Anming, Lin Hui, Shi Bei, Ren Yi, Wen Hongzhu, Fei Xiaoyan, Lin Jiang","doi":"10.19852/j.cnki.jtcm.20231121.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Qingchang suppository (, QCS), a preparation of Chinese herbal medicine, in the induction of remission in patients with mild-to-moderate ulcerative proctitis (UP).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a multicenter, prospective, randomized, parallel-controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of QCS induction therapy in 140 adult patients with mild-to-moderate UP and TCM syndrome of dampness-heat in large intestine. The patients were randomized to receive QCS (study group) or Salicylazosulfapyridine (SASP) suppository (control group) one piece each time, twice a day, per anum for 12 weeks. Mayo score and main symptoms score were evaluated at weeks 0, 2, 4, 8 and 12, rectosigmoidscopy was taken at weeks 0, 4, 8 and 12, Geboes score, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP) and safety indexes were assessed at weeks 0 and 12. The primary efficacy endpoint is clinical remission rate, the secondary efficacy endpoints are clinical response rate, mucosa healing rate, Geboes score, the remission rates of the main symptoms, the median day to the remission of the symptom, etc. RESULTS: There were no statistical difference in the clinical remission rates, the clinical response rates, the mucosa healing rates, Geboes score, ESR and CRP between the two groups. The remission rates of tenesmus and anal burning sensation of the study group were significantly higher than those of the control group (76.5% <i>vs</i> 25.0%, <i>P =</i> 0.009; 74.51% <i>vs</i> 29.63%, <i>P =</i> 0.003). The median day to the remission of purulent bloody stool of the study group was significantly less than that of control group [11 (1, 64) <i>vs</i> 19 (2, 67), <i>P =</i> 0.007]. The patients receiving QCS had a significantly higher mucosa healing rate at week 4 than the patients receiving SASP suppository (71.42% <i>vs</i> 52.85%, <i>P =</i> 0.023). No adverse event occurred in the study group while the adverse events incidence of the control group was 5.7% (<i>P =</i> 0.049).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>QCS could induce the remission of UP as effectively and safely as SASP suppository, and was superior to SASP suppository in relieving the symptoms of tenesmus, anal burning sensation and purulent bloody stool and the time to reach mucosa healing.</p>","PeriodicalId":94119,"journal":{"name":"Journal of traditional Chinese medicine = Chung i tsa chih ying wen pan","volume":"44 1","pages":"156-162"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10774720/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Qingchang suppositry induced remission in patients with mild-to-moderate ulcerative proctitis: a multicenter, prospective, randomized, parallel-controlled clinical trial.\",\"authors\":\"Dai Xiaoling, Zhang Anming, Lin Hui, Shi Bei, Ren Yi, Wen Hongzhu, Fei Xiaoyan, Lin Jiang\",\"doi\":\"10.19852/j.cnki.jtcm.20231121.004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Qingchang suppository (, QCS), a preparation of Chinese herbal medicine, in the induction of remission in patients with mild-to-moderate ulcerative proctitis (UP).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a multicenter, prospective, randomized, parallel-controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of QCS induction therapy in 140 adult patients with mild-to-moderate UP and TCM syndrome of dampness-heat in large intestine. The patients were randomized to receive QCS (study group) or Salicylazosulfapyridine (SASP) suppository (control group) one piece each time, twice a day, per anum for 12 weeks. Mayo score and main symptoms score were evaluated at weeks 0, 2, 4, 8 and 12, rectosigmoidscopy was taken at weeks 0, 4, 8 and 12, Geboes score, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP) and safety indexes were assessed at weeks 0 and 12. The primary efficacy endpoint is clinical remission rate, the secondary efficacy endpoints are clinical response rate, mucosa healing rate, Geboes score, the remission rates of the main symptoms, the median day to the remission of the symptom, etc. RESULTS: There were no statistical difference in the clinical remission rates, the clinical response rates, the mucosa healing rates, Geboes score, ESR and CRP between the two groups. The remission rates of tenesmus and anal burning sensation of the study group were significantly higher than those of the control group (76.5% <i>vs</i> 25.0%, <i>P =</i> 0.009; 74.51% <i>vs</i> 29.63%, <i>P =</i> 0.003). The median day to the remission of purulent bloody stool of the study group was significantly less than that of control group [11 (1, 64) <i>vs</i> 19 (2, 67), <i>P =</i> 0.007]. The patients receiving QCS had a significantly higher mucosa healing rate at week 4 than the patients receiving SASP suppository (71.42% <i>vs</i> 52.85%, <i>P =</i> 0.023). No adverse event occurred in the study group while the adverse events incidence of the control group was 5.7% (<i>P =</i> 0.049).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>QCS could induce the remission of UP as effectively and safely as SASP suppository, and was superior to SASP suppository in relieving the symptoms of tenesmus, anal burning sensation and purulent bloody stool and the time to reach mucosa healing.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94119,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of traditional Chinese medicine = Chung i tsa chih ying wen pan\",\"volume\":\"44 1\",\"pages\":\"156-162\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10774720/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of traditional Chinese medicine = Chung i tsa chih ying wen pan\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.19852/j.cnki.jtcm.20231121.004\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of traditional Chinese medicine = Chung i tsa chih ying wen pan","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.19852/j.cnki.jtcm.20231121.004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的评价清畅栓剂(一种中药制剂)诱导轻中度溃疡性直肠炎(UP)患者病情缓解的疗效和安全性:我们进行了一项多中心、前瞻性、随机、平行对照试验,以评估QCS诱导疗法对140例轻中度溃疡性直肠炎和中医大肠湿热证成人患者的疗效。患者随机接受 QCS(研究组)或柳氮磺吡啶栓剂(对照组)治疗,每次一粒,每天两次,经肛门使用,为期 12 周。在第 0、2、4、8 和 12 周评估梅奥评分和主要症状评分,在第 0、4、8 和 12 周进行直肠乙状结肠镜检查,在第 0 和 12 周评估 Geboes 评分、红细胞沉降率(ESR)、C 反应蛋白(CRP)和安全性指标。主要疗效终点为临床缓解率,次要疗效终点为临床反应率、黏膜愈合率、Geboes评分、主要症状缓解率、症状缓解中位天数等。结果:两组患者的临床缓解率、临床反应率、黏膜愈合率、Geboes 评分、血沉和 CRP 均无统计学差异。研究组痛经和肛门烧灼感的缓解率明显高于对照组(76.5% vs 25.0%,P = 0.009;74.51% vs 29.63%,P = 0.003)。研究组患者脓血便缓解的中位天数明显少于对照组 [11 (1, 64) vs 19 (2, 67), P = 0.007]。接受 QCS 治疗的患者在第 4 周的粘膜愈合率明显高于接受 SASP 栓剂治疗的患者(71.42% vs 52.85%,P = 0.023)。研究组无不良反应发生,而对照组的不良反应发生率为5.7%(P = 0.049):结论:QCS与SASP栓剂一样能有效、安全地诱导UP缓解,在缓解胀痛、肛门烧灼感和脓血便症状以及黏膜愈合时间方面优于SASP栓剂。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Qingchang suppositry induced remission in patients with mild-to-moderate ulcerative proctitis: a multicenter, prospective, randomized, parallel-controlled clinical trial.

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Qingchang suppository (, QCS), a preparation of Chinese herbal medicine, in the induction of remission in patients with mild-to-moderate ulcerative proctitis (UP).

Methods: We performed a multicenter, prospective, randomized, parallel-controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of QCS induction therapy in 140 adult patients with mild-to-moderate UP and TCM syndrome of dampness-heat in large intestine. The patients were randomized to receive QCS (study group) or Salicylazosulfapyridine (SASP) suppository (control group) one piece each time, twice a day, per anum for 12 weeks. Mayo score and main symptoms score were evaluated at weeks 0, 2, 4, 8 and 12, rectosigmoidscopy was taken at weeks 0, 4, 8 and 12, Geboes score, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP) and safety indexes were assessed at weeks 0 and 12. The primary efficacy endpoint is clinical remission rate, the secondary efficacy endpoints are clinical response rate, mucosa healing rate, Geboes score, the remission rates of the main symptoms, the median day to the remission of the symptom, etc. RESULTS: There were no statistical difference in the clinical remission rates, the clinical response rates, the mucosa healing rates, Geboes score, ESR and CRP between the two groups. The remission rates of tenesmus and anal burning sensation of the study group were significantly higher than those of the control group (76.5% vs 25.0%, P = 0.009; 74.51% vs 29.63%, P = 0.003). The median day to the remission of purulent bloody stool of the study group was significantly less than that of control group [11 (1, 64) vs 19 (2, 67), P = 0.007]. The patients receiving QCS had a significantly higher mucosa healing rate at week 4 than the patients receiving SASP suppository (71.42% vs 52.85%, P = 0.023). No adverse event occurred in the study group while the adverse events incidence of the control group was 5.7% (P = 0.049).

Conclusions: QCS could induce the remission of UP as effectively and safely as SASP suppository, and was superior to SASP suppository in relieving the symptoms of tenesmus, anal burning sensation and purulent bloody stool and the time to reach mucosa healing.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信