Irritable Bowel Syndrome Drugs Research Articles

Evaluating Equity in Clinical Trial Accessibility: An Analysis of Demographic, Socioeconomic, and Educational Disparities in Irritable Bowel Syndrome Drug Trials.

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), a disorder of gut-brain interaction, imposes a significant economic burden because of its high prevalence and the chronic nature of its symptoms. IBS currently has 7 United States Food and Drug Administration-approved treatments. Despite efforts to improve diversity in randomized controlled trials' participation, significant disparities remain in various medical fields; yet, these have not been thoroughly examined within the context of IBS. We aimed to investigate the demographic, socioeconomic, educational, and geographic disparities in IBS drug trials. We conducted a systematic review of phase 3 randomized controlled trials on United States Food and Drug Administration-approved drugs for the treatment of IBS with constipation and IBS with diarrhea in the United States. Data on participant demographics and trial site locations were extracted and analyzed to identify disparities. Our analysis included 17 studies encompassing 21 trials with 17,428 participants. Approximately 77.3% of participants were female, with a mean age of 45.4 years. Race was reported in 95% of the trials, but only 35% disclosed ethnicity. White participants constituted the majority at 79.3%. Hispanics accounted for only 5.9%. Counties without trial sites had smaller average population sizes compared with trial and trial-adjacent counties. Socioeconomic indicators such as poverty rates, median household income, educational attainment, and broadband internet access were lower in counties without trial sites, with higher average Area Deprivation Index scores indicating greater deprivation. The findings highlight significant disparities in IBS trial participation across race, ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic backgrounds. This raises potential concerns about generalizability of trial outcomes and underscores the need for strategies to enhance inclusivity in clinical research.

Unmet needs of drugs for irritable bowel syndrome and inflammatory bowel diseases: interest of vagus nerve stimulation and hypnosis.

The gut and the brain communicate bidirectionally through the autonomic nervous system. The vagus nerve is a key component of this gut-brain axis, and has numerous properties such as anti-inflammatory, antinociceptive, anti-depressive effects. A perturbation of this gut-brain communication is involved in the pathogeny of functional digestive disorders, such as irritable bowel syndrome, and inflammatory bowel diseases. Stress plays a role in the pathogeny of these diseases, which are biopsychosocial models. There are presently unmet needs of pharmacological treatments of these chronic debilitating diseases. Treatments are not devoid of side effects, cost-effective, do not cure the diseases, can lose effects over time, thus explaining the poor satisfaction of patients, their lack of compliance, and their interest for non-drug therapies. The gut-brain axis can be targeted for therapeutic purposes in irritable bowel syndrome and inflammatory bowel disease through non-drug therapies, such as hypnosis and vagus nerve stimulation, opening up possibilities for responding to patient expectations.

Efficacy and safety of peppermint oil for the treatment in Japanese patients with irritable bowel syndrome: a prospective, open-label, and single-arm study

BackgroundIn Europe, an herbal medicine containing peppermint oil is widely used in patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). In Japan, however, no clinical evidence for peppermint oil in IBS has been established, and it has not been approved as a drug for IBS. Accordingly, we conducted a clinical study to confirm the efficacy and safety of peppermint oil (ZO-Y60) in Japanese patients with IBS.MethodsThe study was a multi-center, open-label, single-arm, phase 3 trial in Japanese outpatients with IBS aged 17–60 years and diagnosed according to the Rome III criteria. The subjects were treated with an oral capsule of ZO-Y60 three times a day before meals, for four weeks. The efficacy of ZO-Y60 was evaluated using the patient’s global assessment (PtGA), IBS symptom severity score, stool frequency score, stool form score, and physician’s global assessment (PGA). The safety of ZO-Y60 was also assessed.ResultsSixty-nine subjects were treated with ZO-Y60. During the four-week administration of ZO-Y60, the improvement rate of the PtGA was 71.6% (48/67) in week 2 and 85.1% (57/67) in week 4. It was also suggested that ZO-Y60 is effective against any type of IBS (IBS with constipation, IBS with diarrhea, and mixed/unsubtyped IBS). The improvement rate of the PGA was 73.1% (49/67) in week 2 and 85.1% (57/67) in week 4, also confirming the efficacy of ZO-Y60. Adverse events were observed in 14 subjects (20.3%), however, none of these adverse events were categorized as serious.ConclusionThe efficacy of treatment was confirmed, subjective symptoms were improved, as was observed in previous clinical studies of ZO-Y60 conducted outside of Japan. All adverse reactions were previously known and were non-serious. These findings suggest that peppermint oil may be effective in the Japanese population and that it has an acceptable safety profile.Trial registrationJAPIC Clinical Trials Information number: JapicCTI-121727 https://jrct.niph.go.jp/en-latest-detail/jRCT1080221685. Registration date: 2012–01-10.

Novel Symptom Subgroups in Individuals With Irritable Bowel Syndrome Predict Disease Impact and Burden

Current classification systems based on bowel habit fail to capture the multidimensional nature of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). We previously derived and validated a classification system, using latent class analysis, incorporating factors beyond bowel habit. We applied this in another cohort of people with IBS to assess its ability to capture the impact of IBS on the individual, the health care system, and society. We collected demographic, symptom, and psychological health data from adults in the community self-identifying as having IBS, and meeting Rome IV criteria. We applied our latent class analysis model to identify the 7 subgroups (clusters) described previously, based on overall gastrointestinal symptom severity and psychological burden. We assessed quality of life, health care costs (£1 = $1.20), employment status, annual income, work productivity, and ability to perform work duties in each cluster. Of 1278 responders, 752 (58.8%) met Rome IV criteria. The 7-cluster model fit the data well. The patients in the 4 clusters with the highest psychological burden, and particularly those in cluster 6 with high overall gastrointestinal symptom severity and high psychological burden, showed lower educational levels, higher gastrointestinal symptom-specific anxiety, were more likely to have consulted a gastroenterologist, and used more drugs for IBS. IBS-related and generic quality of life were impaired significantly in these 4 clusters and significantly fewer individuals reported earning ≥£30,000 per year. Productivity and the ability to work, manage at home, engage in social and private leisure activities, and maintain close relationships all were impacted significantly, and IBS-related health care costs over the previous 12 months were highest in these 4 clusters. In those in cluster 6, costs were more than £1000 per person per year. Our clusters identify groups of individuals with significant impairments in quality of life, earning potential, and ability to work and function socially, who are high utilizers of health care.

Current and Future Therapeutic Options for Irritable Bowel Syndrome with Diarrhea and Functional Diarrhea.

Irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhea and functional diarrhea are disorders of gut-brain interaction presenting with chronic diarrhea; they have significant impact on quality of life. The two conditions may exist as a continuum and their treatment may overlap. Response to first-line therapy with antispasmodics and anti-diarrheal agents is variable, leaving several patients with suboptimal symptom control and need for alternative therapeutic options. Our aim was to discuss current pharmacologic options and explore alternative therapeutic approaches and future perspectives for symptom management in irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhea and functional diarrhea. We conducted a search of PubMed, Cochrane, clinicaltrial.gov, major meeting abstracts for publications on current, alternative, and emerging drugs for irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhea and functional diarrhea. Currently approved therapeutic options for patients with first-line refractory irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhea and functional diarrhea include serotonin-3 receptor antagonists, eluxadoline and rifaximin. Despite their proven efficacy, cost and availability worldwide impact their utilization. One-third of patients with disorders of gut-brain interaction with diarrhea have bile acid diarrhea and may benefit from drugs targeting bile acid synthesis and excretion. Further understanding of underlying pathophysiology of irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhea and functional diarrhea related to bile acid metabolism, gastrointestinal transit, and microbiome has led to evaluation of novel therapeutic approaches, including fecal microbiota transplantation and enterobacterial "crapsules". These opportunities to treat disorders of gut-brain interaction with diarrhea should be followed with formal studies utilizing large samples of well-characterized patients at baseline and validated response outcomes as endpoints for regulatory approval.

Increased prescriptions for irritable bowel syndrome after the 2018 Japan Floods: a longitudinal analysis based on the Japanese National Database of Health Insurance Claims and Specific Health Checkups

BackgroundThe frequency and intensity of natural disasters are increasing worldwide, which makes our understanding of disaster-related diseases more important than ever. Natural disasters cause mental stress and infectious diarrhea, but the causal relationship between disasters and a potential consequence of these conditions, irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), is unreported. The 2018 Japan Floods, which took place in July 2018 was one of the largest water disasters in Japan’s recorded history. We investigate the change of drug prescriptions for IBS between disaster-suffers and non-sufferers throughout the disaster period to examine the relationship.MethodsThis is a retrospective cohort study based on the Japanese National Database of Health Insurance Claims and Specific Health Checkups in flood-stricken areas between July 2017 and June 2019. We included subjects older than 15 years of age who had visited a medical institution or been hospitalized in the hardest-hit areas of the disaster. Ramosetron, polycarbophil calcium, and mepenzolate bromide (IBS drugs) approved solely for the treatment of IBS in Japan were analyzed. The monthly rate of prescriptions for IBS drugs was compared between municipality-certified disaster victims and non-victims using a controlled interrupted time series analysis. For those who were not prescribed IBS drugs before the disaster (non-users), the occurrence of an IBS drug prescription after the disaster was evaluated using a multivariable logistic regression analysis adjusted for gender and age.ResultsOf 5,287,888 people enrolled, 32,499 (0.61%) were certified victims. The prescription rate for IBS drugs among victims increased significantly by 128% immediately after the disaster, while it was stable among non-victims. The trend for the post-disaster prescription rate among victims moved upward significantly when compared to non-victims (0.01% per month; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.004–0.015; P = 0.001). Among non-users, the occurrence of an IBS drug prescription for victims was 0.71% and was significantly higher than non-victims (0.35%, adjusted odds ratio 2.05; 95% CI 1.81–2.32).ConclusionsThe 2018 Japan Floods increased the rate of prescriptions for IBS drugs, suggesting that the disaster caused or worsened IBS among victims.

Eluxadoline Versus Antispasmodics in the Treatment of Irritable Bowel Syndrome: An Adjusted Indirect Treatment Comparison Meta-analysis.

Objective: Eluxadoline is a newly approved drug for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), but it has rarely been compared with positive controls. We aimed to compare eluxadoline with antispasmodics in the treatment of IBS. Methods: We searched the OVID Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing eluxadoline or antispasmodics with placebo. The search was conducted from 1 January 1980, to 1 September 2020, without any language restrictions. The primary efficacy outcome was the relief of abdominal pain, defined by a reduction of pain scores of at least 30% from baseline. The secondary efficacy outcome was the relief of global IBS symptoms, defined by a composite response of a decrease in abdominal pain and improvement in stool consistency on the same day for at least 50% of the days assessed. The data were pooled using a random-effects model. Outcome estimates were pooled by using Risk Ratios (RRs) and P-scores. Results: Forty-two trials with 8,457 participants were included from 45 articles. Compared with placebo, each of drotaverine, pinaverium, alverine combined with simethicone (ACS) and eluxadoline 100 mg was highly effective in the relief of abdominal pain, with drotaverine [RR, 2.71 (95% CI, 1.70 to 4.32), P-score = 0.95] ranking first. Drotaverine, otilonium, cimetropium, pinaverium, and eluxadoline 100 mg had significantly high the relief of global IBS symptomss, for which drotaverine [RR, 2.45 (95% CI, 1.42 to 4.22), P-score = 0.95] was ranked first. No significant difference was found between these interventions. Pinaverium had a significantly higher the relief of global IBS symptoms than eluxadoline [RR, 1.72 (95% CI, 1.33 to 2.21)] on sensitivity analysis. However, no significant difference was found in the number of adverse events between each intervention and the placebo. Conclusion: Our network meta-analysis showed that eluxadoline 100 mg was at least as effective as antispasmodics in relieving abdominal pain in IBS. But eluxadoline had more reported adverse events. Antispasmodics are still the first choice for the treatment of IBS.

Willingness to accept risk with medication in return for cure of symptoms among patients with Rome IV irritable bowel syndrome.

SummaryBackgroundSome drugs for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) have serious side effects.AimsTo examine the willingness of individuals with IBS to accept risks with medication in return for symptom cure.MethodsWe collected demographic, gastrointestinal symptoms, psychological health, quality of life and impact on work and daily activities data from 752 adults with Rome IV‐defined IBS. We examined median willingness to accept death in return for cure with a hypothetical medication using a standard gamble, according to these variables.ResultsParticipants would accept a median 2.0% (IQR 0.0%‐9.0%) risk of death in return for a 98.0% (IQR 91.0%‐100.0%) chance of permanent symptom cure. The median accepted risk of death was higher in men (5.0% vs 2.0%, P < 0.001), those with continuous abdominal pain (4.0% vs 1.0%, P < 0.001), more severe symptoms (P = 0.005 for trend), abnormal depression scores (P < 0.001 for trend), higher gastrointestinal symptom‐specific anxiety (P < 0.001 for trend), and lower IBS‐related quality of life (P < 0.001 for trend). Those willing to accept above median risk of death were more likely to be male (17.1% vs 9.1%, P < 0.001), take higher levels of risks in their daily life (P = 0.008 for trend), and report continuous abdominal pain (53.1% vs 39.4%, P < 0.001), and had higher depression (P = 0.004 for trend) and lower quality of life (P < 0.001 for trend) scores.ConclusionPatients are willing to accept significant risks in return for cure of their IBS symptoms.

Diarrhea-Predominant and Constipation-Predominant Irritable Bowel Syndrome: Current Prescription Drug Treatment Options.

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a heterogenous disease with a variety of therapeutic options, including eight prescription drugs approved for use in IBS in the USA. Choosing among the myriad treatment options requires attention to patient preferences both on clinical outcomes and costs associated with treatment. We performed a narrative review of the literature to summarize these important determinants of treatment choice including: labeled indications; clinical profiles of efficacy, safety, and tolerability of prescription drugs; and cost-effectiveness for diarrhea-predominant IBS drugs (IBS-D: alosetron, eluxadoline, and rifaximin) and constipation-predominant IBS drugs (IBS-C: linaclotide, lubiprostone, plecanatide, tegaserod, and tenapanor). We then review the standard model of shared decision-making aimed at guiding an informed, patient-centered discussion to integrate comparative clinical and cost outcomes toward choosing an IBS treatment in practice.

Adverse events in trials of licensed drugs for irritable bowel syndrome with constipation or diarrhea: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Nocebo effects occurring in patients receiving placebo frequently impact on adverse events reported in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the proportion of patients randomized to placebo or active drug experiencing any adverse event in trials of licensed drugs for IBS with constipation (IBS-C) or diarrhea (IBS-D), and to estimate the risk of developing adverse events among patients randomized to placebo. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE CLASSIC and EMBASE, and the Cochrane central register of controlled trials (through June 2021) to identify RCTs comparing licensed drugs with placebo in adults with IBS-C or IBS-D. We generated Forest plots of pooled adverse event rates in both active drug and placebo arms and pooled risk differences (RDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). There were 21 RCTs of licensed drugs versus placebo in IBS-C (5953 patients placebo) and 17 in IBS-D (3854 patients placebo). Overall, 34.9% and 46.9% of placebo patients in IBS-C and IBS-D trials, respectively, developed at least one adverse event, with a statistically significantly higher risk of any adverse event and withdrawal due to an adverse event with active drug. In IBS-C and IBS-D trials, rates of each individual adverse event were generally higher with active drug. However, in IBS-C trials, only diarrhea or headache was significantly more common with active drug (RD 0.066 (95% CI 0.043-0.088) and RD 0.011 (95% CI 0.002-0.021), respectively), and in IBS-D trials only constipation, nausea, or abdominal pain (RD 0.096 (95% CI 0.054-0.138), 0.014 (95% CI 0.002-0.027), and 0.018 (95% CI 0.002-0.034), respectively). Patients with IBS randomized to placebo have a high risk of reporting adverse events, which might relate to both nocebo and non-nocebo factors. Although patients' expectations and psychosocial factors may be involved, further understanding of the mechanisms are important to control or optimize these effects in RCTs, as well as in clinical practice.

Illness perception and health care use in individuals with irritable bowel syndrome: results from an online survey

BackgroundIndividual illness perception is known to influence a range of outcome variables. However, little is known regarding illness perception in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and its relation to the use of the health care system. This study hypothesised a relationship between illness perception and inappropriate health care use (under-, over- and misuse).MethodsAn internet-based, cross-sectional study in participants affected by IBS symptoms was carried out (April – October 2019) using open questions as well as validated standardized instruments, e.g. the illness perception questionnaire revised (IPQ-R) and its subscales. Sub-group comparisons were done non-parametrically and effect sizes were reported. Potential predictors of (1) conventional health care utilisation and (2) utilisation of treatment approaches with lacking or weak evidence regarding effectiveness in IBS were examined with logistic regression analyses and reported as odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval.ResultsData from 513 individuals were available. More than one-third (35.7%) of participants were classified as high utilisers (> 5 doctor visits during the last year). Several indicators of inappropriate health care use were detected, such as a low proportion of state-of-the-art gynaecological evaluation of symptoms (35.0% of women) and a high proportion of individuals taking ineffective and not recommended non-steroidal antirheumatic drugs for IBS (29.4%). A majority (57.7%) used treatment approaches with lacking or weak evidence regarding the effectiveness in IBS (e.g. homeopathy). Being a high utiliser as defined above was predicted by the perceived daily life consequences of IBS (IPQ-R subscale “consequences”, OR = 1.189 [1.100–1.284], p ≤ 0.001) and age (OR = 0.980 [0.962–0.998], p = 0.027). The use of treatment approaches with lacking or weak evidence was forecasted by the perceived daily life consequences (OR = 1.155 [1.091–1.223], p ≤ 0.001) and gender (reference category male: OR = 0.537 [0.327–0.881], p = 0.014), however effect sizes were small.ConclusionsDaily life consequences, perceived cure and personal control as aspects of individual disease perception seem to be related to individuals’ health care use. These aspects should be a standard part of the medical interview and actively explored. To face inappropriate health care use patients and professionals need to be trained. Interdisciplinary collaborative care may contribute to enhanced quality of medical supply in IBS.

Tegaserod for Irritable Bowel Syndrome With Constipation in Women Younger Than 65 Years Without Cardiovascular Disease: Pooled Analyses of 4 Controlled Trials.

INTRODUCTION:Tegaserod was the first US Food and Drug Administration–approved drug for irritable bowel syndrome with constipation (IBS-C) in women and was recently reapproved for use. Recognizing that clinical trials were performed almost 20 years ago, we performed an integrated analysis on patient-reported outcomes relevant to current practice including previously unpublished data.METHODS:Data from 4 12-week, randomized, placebo-controlled trials evaluating tegaserod 6 mg b.i.d. in patients with IBS-C were pooled. We analyzed 2 groups: all women (overall population) and women younger than 65 years without a history of cardiovascular ischemic events (indicated population). The primary end point was subjective global assessment of IBS-C symptom relief. Responders rated themselves as “considerably” or “completely” relieved ≥50% of the time or at least “somewhat relieved” 100% of the time over the last 4 weeks.RESULTS:The overall and indicated populations included 2,939 (tegaserod [n = 1,478]; placebo [n = 1,461]) and 2,752 (tegaserod [n = 1,386]; placebo [n = 1,366]) participants, respectively. The pooled odds ratios (95% confidence interval) for clinical response during the last 4 weeks in the overall and indicated populations with tegaserod were 1.37 (1.18, 1.59; P < 0.001) and 1.38 (1.18, 1.61; P < 0.001). In the overall and indicated populations, clinical response rates for tegaserod during the last 4 weeks were 43.3% and 44.1% versus 35.9% and 36.5% with placebo (P < 0.001). Adverse events were similar between groups. No significant cardiovascular events related to tegaserod were observed in patients with ≤1 cardiac risk factor.DISCUSSION:Tegaserod 6 mg b.i.d. reduced IBS-C symptoms in overall and US Food and Drug Administration–indicated populations (women aged <65 years with no history of cardiovascular ischemic events).

Gastrointestinal medication burden among persons with the Ehlers-Danlos syndromes.

The Ehlers-Danlos syndromes (EDSs) are a group of heritable disorders of connective tissue associated with an increased prevalence of both structural and functional GI conditions. We used 10years (2005-2014) of administrative claims data comprised of 4294 people with clinician-diagnosed EDS, aged 5-62years, and compared their frequency of GI drug prescription claims to their age-, sex-, state of residence-, and earliest claim date-matched controls. We categorized the GI medications into the following groups: acid suppressants, anti-emetics, irritable bowel syndrome drugs, and visceral hypersensitivity (VHS) medications. Compared to controls, a significantly higher proportion of persons with EDS had prescription claims for at least one GI drug group, as well as for drugs in each of the four GI drug groups included in our study. By age-group, 25.7% children and 45.1% adults with EDS had prescription claims for at least one GI drug group compared with only 7.4% and 21.0% of controls, respectively (p<0.0001). By gender, 44.0% of women and 25.3% of men with EDS had prescription claims for at least one class of GI drugs compared with 19.2% and 9.6% of controls, respectively (p<0.0001). Predominant medication burden occurs among women with EDS, beginning peri-pubertally for anti-emetics and VHS drugs. High GI medication burden underscores previous evidence that GI dysmotility is common among persons with EDS.

New therapeutic perspectives in irritable bowel syndrome: Targeting low-grade inflammation, immuno-neuroendocrine axis, motility, secretion and beyond.

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a chronic, recurring, and remitting functional disorder of the gastrointestinal tract characterized by abdominal pain, distention, and changes in bowel habits. Although there are several drugs for IBS, effective and approved treatments for one or more of the symptoms for various IBS subtypes are needed. Improved understanding of pathophysiological mechanisms such as the role of impaired bile acid metabolism, neurohormonal regulation, immune dysfunction, the epithelial barrier and the secretory properties of the gut has led to advancements in the treatment of IBS. With regards to therapies for restoring intestinal permeability, multiple studies with prebiotics and probiotics are ongoing, even if to date their efficacy has been limited. In parallel, much progress has been made in targeting low-grade inflammation, especially through the introduction of drugs such as mesalazine and rifaximin, even if a better knowledge of the mechanisms underlying the low-grade inflammation in IBS may allow the design of clinical trials that test the efficacy and safety of such drugs. This literature review aims to summarize the findings related to new and investigational therapeutic agents for IBS, most recently developed in preclinical as well as Phase 1 and Phase 2 clinical studies.

Pharmacological Approach for Managing Pain in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Review Article.

ContextVisceral pain is a leading symptom for patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) that affects 10% - 20 % of the world population. Conventional pharmacological treatments to manage IBS-related visceral pain is unsatisfactory. Recently, medications have emerged to treat IBS patients by targeting the gastrointestinal (GI) tract and peripheral nerves to alleviate visceral pain while avoiding adverse effects on the central nervous system (CNS). Several investigational drugs for IBS also target the periphery with minimal CNS effects.Evidence of AcquisitionIn this paper, reputable internet databases from 1960 - 2016 were searched including Pubmed and ClinicalTrials.org, and 97 original articles analyzed. Search was performed based on the following keywords and combinations: irritable bowel syndrome, clinical trial, pain, visceral pain, narcotics, opioid, chloride channel, neuropathy, primary afferent, intestine, microbiota, gut barrier, inflammation, diarrhea, constipation, serotonin, visceral hypersensitivity, nociceptor, sensitization, hyperalgesia.ResultsCertain conventional pain managing drugs do not effectively improve IBS symptoms, including NSAIDs, acetaminophen, aspirin, and various narcotics. Anxiolytic and antidepressant drugs (Benzodiazepines, TCAs, SSRI and SNRI) can attenuate pain in IBS patients with relevant comorbidities. Clonidine, gabapentin and pregabalin can moderately improve IBS symptoms. Lubiprostone relieves constipation predominant IBS (IBS-C) while loperamide improves diarrhea predominant IBS (IBS-D). Alosetron, granisetron and ondansetron can generally treat pain in IBS-D patients, of which alosetron needs to be used with caution due to cardiovascular toxicity. The optimal drugs for managing pain in IBS-D and IBS-C appear to be eluxadoline and linaclotide, respectively, both of which target peripheral GI tract.ConclusionsConventional pain managing drugs are in general not suitable for treating IBS pain. Medications that target the GI tract and peripheral nerves have better therapeutic profiles by limiting adverse CNS effects.

Aminophylline suppresses stress-induced visceral hypersensitivity and defecation in irritable bowel syndrome

Pharmacological therapy for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) has not been established. In order to find candidate drugs for IBS with diarrhea (IBS-D), we screened a compound library of drugs clinically used for their ability to prevent stress-induced defecation and visceral hypersensitivity in rats. We selected the bronchodilator aminophylline from this library. Using a specific inhibitor for each subtype of adenosine receptors (ARs) and phosphodiesterases (PDEs), we found that both A2BARs and PDE4 are probably mediated the inhibitory effect of aminophylline on wrap restraint stress (WRS)-induced defecation. Aminophylline suppressed maternal separation- and acetic acid administration-induced visceral hypersensitivity to colorectal distension (CRD), which was mediated by both A2AARs and A2BARs. We propose that aminophylline is a candidate drug for IBS-D because of its efficacy in both of stress-induced defecation and visceral hypersensitivity, as we observed here, and because it is clinically safe.

Drug development: A healthy pipeline.

Drugs for irritable bowel syndrome have so far been limited, but a promising stream of options could soon enter the market.

Irritable bowel syndrome drug given green light for use in Europe

Irritable bowel syndrome drug given green light for use in Europe

FDA approves two new drugs for irritable bowel syndrome

FDA approves two new drugs for irritable bowel syndrome

Metabolic and toxicological considerations for the latest drugs used to treat irritable bowel syndrome

Introduction: The high prevalence of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), a chronic gastrointestinal (GI) disorder, its lack of satisfactory effective drugs and its complicated pathophysiology lead to the demand of new therapeutic agents. During a new drug development process, the pharmacokinetic profiling is of a great considerable importance comparable to drug's efficacy. This involves the drug's absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion, all of which are crucial to its usefulness. In addition, the toxicological profile and possible adverse reactions of the drug should be identified. Also its interactions should be identified at different phases of trials. Several pharmacokinetic studies are carried out to achieve drugs with the best absorption and bioavailability and the least adverse effects and lowest toxicity.Areas covered: To make an update on new clinically introduced drugs for IBS and their dynamics and kinetics data, the present systematic review was accomplished. All relevant bibliographic databases were searched from the year 2003 up to May 2012 to identify all clinical trials that evaluated the potential efficacy of a novel agent in IBS.Expert opinion: Some evaluated drugs, such as ramosetron (5-HT3 antagonist) and pexacerfont (CRF1 receptor antagonist), have shown some benefits in diarrhea-predominant IBS (D-IBS), while, prucalopride and mosapride (5-HT4 agonist) with prokinetic effect were found useful in constipation-predominant IBS (C-IBS). Besides, dexloxiglumide, lubiprostone and linaclotide have shown beneficial effects in C-IBS patients. Melatonin regulates GI tract motility and, asimadoline, gabapentin and pregabalin show reduction of pain threshold and visceral hypersensitivity. Glucagon-like peptide analog, calcium-channel blockers and neurokinin receptor antagonists have shown benefits in pain attacks. More time is required to indicate both efficacy and safety in long-term treatment due to multifactorial pathophysiology, variations in individual responses and insufficient assessment methods, which limit the right decision-making process about the efficacy and tolerability of these new drugs.