BACKGROUND: Biological agents are commonly used for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). As new treatments, tofacitinib, and fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) have demonstrated efficacy in treating UC. This network meta-analysis aims to determine the efficacy and safety of biological agents, tofacitinib, and FMT.
METHODS: A network meta-analysis was conducted by systematically searching the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Libraries. According to strict inclusion and exclusion criteria, we included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of biological agents, tofacitinib, and FMT in UC. A random-effect model was chosen by the network meta-analysis and sensitivity analysis. Heterogeneity test and publication bias test were performed to determine the efficacy of treatments.
RESULTS: Data were extracted from 16 RCTs and we found that all treatments were more effective than the placebos. A total of 21 comparisons were made to determine efficiency. We found that infliximab, vedolizumab, and FMT performed better curative effect in terms of absolute effects and relative ranks. Furthermore, there was no statistical difference in the efficacy of biological agents, tofacitinib, and FMT. Moreover, no treatments were found to increase the occurrence of adverse events when compared with placebos, except infliximab. However, vedolizumab seemed to reduce the occurrence of adverse events compared with infliximab.
CONCLUSION: Of the biological agents, vedolizumab and infliximab were the most effective, suggesting that biological agents are still a better choice. Nevertheless, tofacitinib and FMT may be promising alternatives with high efficacies. However, more safety and maintenance studies need to be conducted in future for the acquisition of more accurate results.Abbreviations: FMT: Fecal microbiota transplantation; UC: Ulcerative colitis; RCTs: Randomized controlled trials; IBD: Inflammatory bowel disease; CD: Crohn's disease; IBS: Irritable bowel syndrome; CDI: Clostridium difficile infections; ITT: Intention-to-treat; RR: Relative risk; CI: Confidence interval; CrI: Credible intervals; IFX: Infliximab; ADA: Adalimumab; TFB: Tofacitinib; GLM: Golimumab; VDZ: Vedolizumab; PBO: Placebo; wk: week; F: Female; M: Male; AEs: Adverse events; SAEs: Serious adverse events; anti-TNF: Anti-tumor necrosis factors.
Aim. Increasing evidence supports the role of the gut microbiota in the etiology of ulcerative colitis (UC). Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is a highly effective treatment against recurrent Clostridium difficile infection; however, its efficacy in UC is still controversial. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of FMT for treatment of active UC. Methods. We searched Cochrane, Medline, Web of Science, and Embase from inception to February 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) recruiting adults with active UC, which compared FMT with controls, were eligible. The primary outcome was combined clinical remission with endoscopic remission/response. Secondary outcomes included clinical remission, endoscopic remission, and serious adverse events. Relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) is reported. Results. Five RCTs with 292 participants were eligible for inclusion. When data were pooled for all patients, FMT was associated with a higher combined clinical remission with endoscopic remission/response; the RR of combined outcome not achieving after FMT vs. control was 0.79 (95% CI 0.70-0.88). FMT delivered via lower gastrointestinal route was superior to upper gastrointestinal route with regard to combined clinical remission with endoscopic remission/response (RR=0.79, 95% CI 0.70-0.89). FMT with pooled donor stool (RR=0.69, 95% CI 0.56-0.85) and higher frequency of administration (RR=0.76, 95% CI 0.62-0.93) may be more effective with regard to clinical remission. There was no statistically significant difference in serious adverse events with FMT compared with controls (RR=0.98, 95% CI 0.93-1.03). Conclusion. FMT shows a promising perspective with comparable safety and favorable clinical efficacy for the treatment of active UC in the short term. However, further larger, more rigorously conducted RCTs of FMT in UC are still needed in order to resolve the controversial questions.
BACKGROUND: Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic, recurrent and destructive disease of the gastrointestinal tract. Faecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is a therapeutic measure in which faecal microbiota from healthy people is transplanted into patients.
AIM: To systematically evaluate the safety and effectiveness of treating UC with different modes of FMT.
METHODS: Seven databases were searched by two independent researchers and studies related to randomized controlled trials were included in the analysis.
RESULTS: Seven studies on UC involving 431 patients were included in the analysis. The results showed that FMT had better efficacy than placebo (OR = 2.29, 95% CI 1.48-3.53, P = 0.0002). Subgroup analyses of influencing factors showed that frozen faeces from multiple donors delivered via the lower gastrointestinal tract had a better curative effect than placebo (OR = 2.76, 95% CI 1.59-4.79, P = 0.0003; OR = 2.93, 95% CI 1.67-5.71, P = 0.0002; and OR = 2.70, 95% CI 1.67-4.37, P < 0.0001); the difference in efficacy between mixed faeces from a single donor transplanted through the upper gastrointestinal tract and placebo was not significant(P = 0.05, P = 0.09 and P = 0.98). The analysis of side effects showed no significant difference between FMT and placebo (P = 0.43).
CONCLUSIONS: It may be safe and effective to transplant frozen faeces from multiple donors through the lower gastrointestinal tract to treat UC.
BACKGROUND/STUDY AIMS: Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT), a treatment aiming to restore dysbiosis by transferring stool from a healthy donor into the patient, has cure rates up to 90% in the management of recurrent Clostridium difficile (C. difficile) diarrhea. This paper tries to determine whether FMT is safe and effective in the treatment of ulcerative colitis, and what the potential characteristics could be of a 'super donor'.
METHODS: The PubMed database was searched using the term fecal microbiota transplantation inflammatory bowel disease. Only articles discussing the use of FMT in the treatment of ulcerative colitis were withheld. Finally, 31 original studies (10 case reports, 17 open label trials, 4 randomized controlled trials (RCTs)) and 1 meta-analysis were included.
RESULTS: So far 4 RCTs have investigated the effectiveness of FMT in treating UC. Three RCTs reported a significant difference between FMT and a control group, achieving clinical remission in 24 to 44% of patients (vs. 5 to 20% of patients in control groups). The meta-analysis confirms that significantly more patients in the FMT-group achieve clinical remission in comparison to patients in the control group (p=0,01) : 42,1% vs. 22,6%. The composition of the gut microbiota plays an important role in the success of FMT-treatment.
CONCLUSION: FMT seems to be a promising and safe therapy in the management of UC. Further research, with larger cohorts, will be needed to confirm this and to determine the optimal FMT procedure.
Background and Purpose. Since the first case of fecal microbiota transplantation for the treatment of ulcerative colitis was described in the year 1989, there have been an increment of case reports, case series, cohort studies, and randomized controlled trials (RCTs). In this study, we were going to investigate general clinical remission, clinical response, and steroid-free remission of fecal microbiota transplantation. Methods. We searched Ovid Medline, Ovid EMBASE, and Cochrane Library, focusing prospective studies including randomized controlled trials and cohort studies. The outcomes were clinical remission, clinical response, steroid-free remission, and serious adverse events. We used RevMan 5.3 software for meta-analyses. Key Results. A total of 4 RCTs and 2 cohort studies (340 cases from 5 countries) were included. We found that FMT might be more effective than placebo on clinical remission (OR, 3.85 [2.21, 6.7]; P < 0 001; I2 = 0%) and clinical response (OR, 2.75 [1.33, 5.67]; P = 0 006; I2 = 49%), but no statistical difference on steroid-free remission (OR, 2.08 [0.41, 10.5]; P = 0 37; I2 = 69%) and serious adverse events (OR, 2.0 [0.17, 22.97]; P = 0 44; I2 = 0%). Conclusions and Inferences. Fecal microbiota transplantations were associated with significant clinical remission and response in ulcerative colitis patients while there was no significant difference found between FMT and placebo in steroid-free remission. Moreover, a common consensus on the route, volume, timing, preferred donor characteristics, and frequency of fecal administration is necessary to achieve remission.
Background and Aims. Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) has challenged the traditional management of ulcerative colitis (UC) in recent years, while it remained controversial. We aimed to provide a systematic protocol of FMT treatment on UC. Methods. Studies reporting on FMT treatment in UC patients were performed. A fixed-effect model was used to assess the efficacy of FMT. Results. Eighteen studies were enrolled (n = 446). A pooled proportion of patients who received FMT had a significant efficacy compared to the placebo group (odds ratio (OR): 2.73, P = 0 002) with a low risk of heterogeneity (P = 0 59, I2 = 0%). The Mayo score decreased to 5 points in a state of mild-moderate activity after FMT treatment, and the optimal range of the Mayo score baseline was 6-9 for FMT administration. Then, the baseline of the Shannon diversity index (SDI) had a negative correlation with the clinical response rate (R = -0 992, P = 0 08) or remission rate (R = -0 998, P = 0 036), and the optimal diversity of bacteria was at 7 days to one month. Moreover, the colonoscopy delivery and unrelated fecal donor had slight superiorities of FMT treatment. Conclusion. FMT treatment had a higher efficacy and shorter time-point of early assessment of effectiveness on UC patients compared to traditional therapies. And the optimal FMT delivery and donor were colonoscopy delivery and unrelated donor in clinical practice.
Biological agents are commonly used for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC). As new treatments, tofacitinib, and fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) have demonstrated efficacy in treating UC. This network meta-analysis aims to determine the efficacy and safety of biological agents, tofacitinib, and FMT.
METHODS:
A network meta-analysis was conducted by systematically searching the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Libraries. According to strict inclusion and exclusion criteria, we included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of biological agents, tofacitinib, and FMT in UC. A random-effect model was chosen by the network meta-analysis and sensitivity analysis. Heterogeneity test and publication bias test were performed to determine the efficacy of treatments.
RESULTS:
Data were extracted from 16 RCTs and we found that all treatments were more effective than the placebos. A total of 21 comparisons were made to determine efficiency. We found that infliximab, vedolizumab, and FMT performed better curative effect in terms of absolute effects and relative ranks. Furthermore, there was no statistical difference in the efficacy of biological agents, tofacitinib, and FMT. Moreover, no treatments were found to increase the occurrence of adverse events when compared with placebos, except infliximab. However, vedolizumab seemed to reduce the occurrence of adverse events compared with infliximab.
CONCLUSION:
Of the biological agents, vedolizumab and infliximab were the most effective, suggesting that biological agents are still a better choice. Nevertheless, tofacitinib and FMT may be promising alternatives with high efficacies. However, more safety and maintenance studies need to be conducted in future for the acquisition of more accurate results.Abbreviations:
