Guest guest Posted June 10, 2008 Report Share Posted June 10, 2008 , I too have finished 5yrs with the study as of last September. I have not recieved such news or an official letter, yet. But it is interesting that a study coordinator told me a couple of weeks ago that the study is going for two more years. This news did not come as a shock to me too for the reasons that you have mentioned. But i did not think that Mayo would not be recommending patients to take Urso, anymore. I think i will still like to continue taking Urso, prescribed by my GI, in a lower dose may be, not because that it has much brought my enzymes that were skyrocketing before entering the study, into close to normal, but because of some other benefits such as moving the bile. Thank you, . And i will let you know if i do recieve a letter within the coming days. PSC/UC From: jasonseakingpolo@... Subject: High Dose Urso Study To: Date: Monday, June 9, 2008, 6:42 PM -------While this news is dissapointing it does not come to a particular shock to me since previous studies had been inconclusive at best. I would be curious to know if other study participants have yet received this news. Supposedly I will receive an official letter in the coming days and be told if I was on " real " Urso or a placebo. in Seattle UC 1991, PSC 2001 - Stage IV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 11, 2008 Report Share Posted June 11, 2008 That is really disappointing. I had such high hopes - my husband's labs, like everyone else's, have improved greatly on high dose Urso. There was some suggestion in the literature, I thought, that Urso was possibly more beneficial when started earlier in the progression of the disease; do we know if those results took that into account? In other words, is it still possible Urso is helpful if it is started early on? Thanks, Nina in Philly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 11, 2008 Report Share Posted June 11, 2008 I am new to PSC, diagnosed May 20th during my 2nd ERCP, to check things out after a hospitalization for pancreatitis with ERCP in March. I had multiple black stones removed in March, and actually had more stones removed already during the 2nd ERCP. So I am wondering what amount of URSO is high does, on May 20th my GI started me on Urso Forte 500mg twice a day. I have not had a chance to discuss my PSC yet because I couldn't get an appointment with my GI until July 2nd, when I can discuss it with him. I do not have the colon cancer issue, as I have not colon. It was removed 25 years ago for ulcerative colitis. But I am lucky and have an internal S-pouch. Thanks in advance for help with this question, Beth B (Thornton, CO) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 11, 2008 Report Share Posted June 11, 2008 , My impression was that this was a fairly new development decided just last week in a meeting of the principal study doctors. I also had been told the study was extended an additional two years just a few months ago so this was an unexpected change in direction. in Seattle > > , > > I too have finished 5yrs with the study as of last September. I have not recieved such news or an official letter, yet. But it is interesting that a study coordinator told me a couple of weeks ago that the study is going for two more years. > > This news did not come as a shock to me too for the reasons that you have mentioned. But i did not think that Mayo would not be recommending patients to take Urso, anymore. I think i will still like to continue taking Urso, prescribed by my GI, in a lower dose may be, not because that it has much brought my enzymes that were skyrocketing before entering the study, into close to normal, but because of some other benefits such as moving the bile. > > Thank you, . And i will let you know if i do recieve a letter within the coming days. > > > PSC/UC > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 11, 2008 Report Share Posted June 11, 2008 Beth, High dose for the purposes of this study were considered to be 25 milligrams per kilogram of body weight. in Seattle > > I am new to PSC, diagnosed May 20th during my 2nd ERCP, to check things > out after a hospitalization for pancreatitis with ERCP in March. I had > multiple black stones removed in March, and actually had more stones > removed already during the 2nd ERCP. > > So I am wondering what amount of URSO is high does, on May 20th my GI > started me on Urso Forte 500mg twice a day. I have not had a chance to > discuss my PSC yet because I couldn't get an appointment with my GI > until July 2nd, when I can discuss it with him. > > I do not have the colon cancer issue, as I have not colon. It was > removed 25 years ago for ulcerative colitis. But I am lucky and have an > internal S-pouch. > > Thanks in advance for help with this question, > > Beth B (Thornton, CO) > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2008 Report Share Posted June 17, 2008 I just wanted to mention that when I saw Dr. Lindor a couple of weeks ago when I was just diagnosed with PSC, he said that they don't give Urso anymore because it wasn't shown to be effective for PSC. So the results are already being implemented in clinical recommendations. Ruth UC 2000, Colectomy 2007, PSC 2008 > > > > I realize I have not posted for awhile and for that I apologize but > I > > do keep up with the messages when my schedule allows. I just > wanted > > to share some information I was given today as a participant in the > > Multi-Center High Dose Urso Study coordinated by The Mayo Clinic > > (through Dr. Lindor). This study, originally slated for 5 years (I > > just finished year 5) was extended last year to gather more data. > > The original plan was to go another two years. > > > > I was just informed that effective immediately all patients are > being > > taken off of the Urso or Placebo doses they have been receiving. > > This is due to there being no evidence that that high dose urso was > > having any benefit. They will continue to follow us for a year to > > study the impact to our lab results. I asked my study coordinator > if > > they will continue to prescribe Urso to PSC patients outside of the > > study and it appears the conclusion is there is no tangible benefit > > and therefore they are not recommending PSC patients continue > taking > > Urso. > > > > While this news is dissapointing it does not come to a particular > > shock to me since previous studies had been inconclusive at best. > I > > would be curious to know if other study participants have yet > > received this news. Supposedly I will receive an official letter > in > > the coming days and be told if I was on " real " Urso or a placebo. > > > > in Seattle > > UC 1991, PSC 2001 - Stage IV > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2008 Report Share Posted June 17, 2008 I just wanted to mention that when I saw Dr. Lindor a couple of weeks ago when I was just diagnosed with PSC, he said that they don't give Urso anymore because it wasn't shown to be effective for PSC. So the results are already being implemented in clinical recommendations. Ruth UC 2000, Colectomy 2007, PSC 2008 > > > > I realize I have not posted for awhile and for that I apologize but > I > > do keep up with the messages when my schedule allows. I just > wanted > > to share some information I was given today as a participant in the > > Multi-Center High Dose Urso Study coordinated by The Mayo Clinic > > (through Dr. Lindor). This study, originally slated for 5 years (I > > just finished year 5) was extended last year to gather more data. > > The original plan was to go another two years. > > > > I was just informed that effective immediately all patients are > being > > taken off of the Urso or Placebo doses they have been receiving. > > This is due to there being no evidence that that high dose urso was > > having any benefit. They will continue to follow us for a year to > > study the impact to our lab results. I asked my study coordinator > if > > they will continue to prescribe Urso to PSC patients outside of the > > study and it appears the conclusion is there is no tangible benefit > > and therefore they are not recommending PSC patients continue > taking > > Urso. > > > > While this news is dissapointing it does not come to a particular > > shock to me since previous studies had been inconclusive at best. > I > > would be curious to know if other study participants have yet > > received this news. Supposedly I will receive an official letter > in > > the coming days and be told if I was on " real " Urso or a placebo. > > > > in Seattle > > UC 1991, PSC 2001 - Stage IV > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2008 Report Share Posted June 17, 2008 I just wanted to mention that when I saw Dr. Lindor a couple of weeks ago when I was just diagnosed with PSC, he said that they don't give Urso anymore because it wasn't shown to be effective for PSC. So the results are already being implemented in clinical recommendations. Ruth UC 2000, Colectomy 2007, PSC 2008 > > > > I realize I have not posted for awhile and for that I apologize but > I > > do keep up with the messages when my schedule allows. I just > wanted > > to share some information I was given today as a participant in the > > Multi-Center High Dose Urso Study coordinated by The Mayo Clinic > > (through Dr. Lindor). This study, originally slated for 5 years (I > > just finished year 5) was extended last year to gather more data. > > The original plan was to go another two years. > > > > I was just informed that effective immediately all patients are > being > > taken off of the Urso or Placebo doses they have been receiving. > > This is due to there being no evidence that that high dose urso was > > having any benefit. They will continue to follow us for a year to > > study the impact to our lab results. I asked my study coordinator > if > > they will continue to prescribe Urso to PSC patients outside of the > > study and it appears the conclusion is there is no tangible benefit > > and therefore they are not recommending PSC patients continue > taking > > Urso. > > > > While this news is dissapointing it does not come to a particular > > shock to me since previous studies had been inconclusive at best. > I > > would be curious to know if other study participants have yet > > received this news. Supposedly I will receive an official letter > in > > the coming days and be told if I was on " real " Urso or a placebo. > > > > in Seattle > > UC 1991, PSC 2001 - Stage IV > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2008 Report Share Posted June 17, 2008 he said that they don't give Urso anymore because it wasn't shown to be effective for PSC>>> But at least in my case it did thin the bile which probably prevented many bouts of cholangitis. The Urso didn't altogether prevent me from developing cholangitis though but my hep was content with the results enough that I got about 6 more years from my original liver. Hopefully the docs won't totally ignore the positive benefit that Urso has for the PSC patient and stop using it. Best regards, Barby - KS UC - 1965, ileostomy - 1972, BCIR (continent pouch) 1994, PSC - 1995, arthritis 2007, tx 11.29.07married 28 years , 5 sons, 2 daughters in law, 1 granddaughter, 1 grandbaby due 10/08 and 1 golden retriever Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2008 Report Share Posted June 17, 2008 he said that they don't give Urso anymore because it wasn't shown to be effective for PSC>>> But at least in my case it did thin the bile which probably prevented many bouts of cholangitis. The Urso didn't altogether prevent me from developing cholangitis though but my hep was content with the results enough that I got about 6 more years from my original liver. Hopefully the docs won't totally ignore the positive benefit that Urso has for the PSC patient and stop using it. Best regards, Barby - KS UC - 1965, ileostomy - 1972, BCIR (continent pouch) 1994, PSC - 1995, arthritis 2007, tx 11.29.07married 28 years , 5 sons, 2 daughters in law, 1 granddaughter, 1 grandbaby due 10/08 and 1 golden retriever Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2008 Report Share Posted June 17, 2008 he said that they don't give Urso anymore because it wasn't shown to be effective for PSC>>> But at least in my case it did thin the bile which probably prevented many bouts of cholangitis. The Urso didn't altogether prevent me from developing cholangitis though but my hep was content with the results enough that I got about 6 more years from my original liver. Hopefully the docs won't totally ignore the positive benefit that Urso has for the PSC patient and stop using it. Best regards, Barby - KS UC - 1965, ileostomy - 1972, BCIR (continent pouch) 1994, PSC - 1995, arthritis 2007, tx 11.29.07married 28 years , 5 sons, 2 daughters in law, 1 granddaughter, 1 grandbaby due 10/08 and 1 golden retriever Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2008 Report Share Posted June 17, 2008 I read a study last year when I first tried URSO and it said the same thing that this study is saying. I got the info from my local pharmacist. I tried it last year as a script from my local gi doc who diagnosed me. But the doc at Baylor All Saints does not prescribe it for every PSC pt. I did not tolerate it well last year, but just started it again about a month ago after my doc at Baylor All Saints suggested it because of increase BM's. I am doing very well on it and feel better than I have in a long time. PSC 5/07 Listed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2008 Report Share Posted June 17, 2008 I read a study last year when I first tried URSO and it said the same thing that this study is saying. I got the info from my local pharmacist. I tried it last year as a script from my local gi doc who diagnosed me. But the doc at Baylor All Saints does not prescribe it for every PSC pt. I did not tolerate it well last year, but just started it again about a month ago after my doc at Baylor All Saints suggested it because of increase BM's. I am doing very well on it and feel better than I have in a long time. PSC 5/07 Listed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2008 Report Share Posted June 17, 2008 I am newly diagnosed with PSC 3/08 stage I and for the 1st time in 2.5 yrs my liver enzymes are normal .I've been on URSO for 3 mos ...I think I'm going to stay on it..I saw my GI guy today he says that is fine with him. Re: High Dose Urso Study > > > > > >>> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 > When I told him that Dr. Chapman thought it should be in the drinking water and I asked about the benefit urso has on colon cancer, Lindor said there has been no clinical proof of that. Hi Tim; One of the best reviews I have seen on chemoprevention of colon cancer in ulcerative colitis patients (with and without PSC) is this one attachede below ... an article used for continuing medical education (CME). Basically it encourages use of 5-aminosalicylates, folic acid and ursodeoxycholic acid for colon cancer prevention. Reference 19 in the reference list is one of the studies that support use of ursodeoxycholic acid in colon cancer prevention in PSC patients, and Dr. Lindor was one of the authors of this paper. Therefore, I find it very odd that Dr. Lindor would say that there is no clinical proof of cancer prevention by urso. Best regards, Dave R. _____________________ Advances in Ulcerative Colitis - Volume 3 CME Release Date: December 14, 2007; Valid for credit through December 14, 2008 http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/566843 Expert Column - Ulcerative Colitis and Colorectal Cancer Chemoprevention Bret A. Lashner, MD Introduction Adherence to medical therapy is a major problem in ulcerative colitis, with some estimates showing that up to 60% of patients fail to take their medications as prescribed. Patients should be encouraged by their physicians to adhere to their medical regimen due to the favorable effect on their disease course.[1] What is often overlooked is the possible cancer chemopreventive effect of these medications. Hopefully, careful discussions regarding the beneficial effects of therapies such as 5-aminosalicylic acid (5- ASA/mesalamine), folic acid, and ursodeoxycholic acid, which include their potential chemopreventive effects, will ultimately lead to better adherence and improved patient outcomes. Colorectal cancer is an important problem for ulcerative colitis patients. The lifetime cumulative incidence has been estimated to be between 5.5% and 13.5%.[2] While these rates are not very different from those seen in the general population, the occurrence of cancer at a young age makes age-specific relative risks at least 3 times the baseline rate. The purported risk factors for cancer are extensive disease, long duration of disease, primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC), family history of colorectal cancer, and possibly chronic uncontrolled inflammation. In case-control studies, cancer surveillance has been associated with a decreased risk of dying from cancer, but still rates are sufficiently elevated to make cancer an important concern.[3] Chemoprevention should be considered complementary to cancer surveillance colonoscopy. 5-ASA Agents Due to their anti-inflammatory effects, 5-ASA agents are the most commonly used medications for the treatment of ulcerative colitis. Indeed, 5-ASA therapy represents the current standard of care for mildly to moderately active ulcerative colitis. This class of drugs is also potentially useful for their chemopreventive effects, largely through mechanisms complementary to anti-inflammatory effects. 5-ASA inactivates reactive oxygen species, dampening the inflammatory cascade and inactivating potential carcinogens. By suppressing nuclear factor-kappaB (NF-kB) systems, 5-ASA decreases cytokine production while increasing NF-kB-dependent apoptosis or programmed cell death of cells with abnormal DNA. Additionally, 5-ASA is also known to decrease interleukin (IL)-2 production, which in turn will diminish clonal proliferation of T cells. Finally, 5-ASA activates peroxisome proliferator-activator receptor (PPAR)-gamma, which demonstrates both antiproliferative and anti-inflammatory effects.[4] Six epidemiologic studies have specifically looked at the potential of 5-ASA as a chemopreventive agent for colorectal cancer in ulcerative colitis; 4 have shown a positive effect and 2 have shown no effect.[5-10] A case-control study from Uppsala, Sweden, compared 102 ulcerative colitis patients with cancer to 196 matched controls without cancer.[5] Results showed that the use of sulfasalazine, a prodrug of 5-ASA, given for at least 3 months, was associated with a significantly diminished risk of developing cancer (odds ratio [OR] 0.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.20-0.69). Cigarette smoking and active ulcerative colitis also had independent protective effects. In a cohort study from Huddinge, Sweden, involving 143 patients with ulcerative colitis who underwent regular colonoscopies and multiple biopsies in a 20-year surveillance program, 36% developed cancer or dysplasia over the course of follow-up.[6] Among patients who received sulfasalazine for at least 6 months, there was a 34% rate of colorectal dysplasia/cancer compared with a 44% rate among patients who were taking sulfasalazine for less than 6 months (not significant). In a cohort study of colorectal cancer risk and treatment adherence conducted at Leicester General Hospital in the United Kingdom involving 175 patients with ulcerative colitis, 5.7% developed cancer within the study period.[7] Among those patients who took sulfasalazine for at least 6 months, the relative risk of developing colorectal cancer was 0.11 (95% CI 0.04-0.28). Alternatively, a case- control study from the United Kingdom comparing 102 ulcerative colitis patients with cancer to matched controls found that sulfasalazine had no significant protective effect; however, regular therapy with other 5-ASA agents was associated with a chemopreventive effect (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.06-0.61).[8] In another study assessing whether 5-ASA use can prevent the development of colorectal cancer in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), Bernstein and colleagues[9] identified 25 cases of IBD with a diagnosis of colorectal cancer between the years 1997 and 2000 from the University of Manitoba Inflammatory Bowel Disease Epidemiology Database. These cases were compared to 348 matched controls (a control group of IBD patients who did not develop colorectal cancer) extracted from this same database. They found that among the cases of ulcerative colitis with colorectal cancer, 45% were 5-ASA users, whereas only 25% of controls were 5-ASA users (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.07-3.25), and there was no dose-response effect. Higher 5-ASA dosing did not incrementally diminish the rate of colorectal cancer development. More recently, a case-control study from the University of Chicago by Rubin and colleagues[10] compared 26 ulcerative colitis patients with cancer or dysplasia to 96 matched controls and found that use of 5-ASA >= 1.2 g daily was associated with a significant chemopreventive effect (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.09-0.85); there was a significant dose-response. A meta-analysis examining these studies and others that have principally looked at agents other than 5-ASA (such as folic acid, immunosuppressives, and corticosteroids) has revealed a significant chemopreventive effect of 5-ASA, even after adjusting for potential confounders (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.29-0.92) on colorectal cancer or dysplasia.[11] Therefore, even though the evidence for chemoprevention may be equivocal, because 5-ASA is also effective in maintaining disease remission, these agents should be recommended for long-term use in patients with ulcerative colitis. Folic Acid Folic acid is essential for the regeneration of the amino acid methionine, which is needed for both purine and pyrimidine biosynthesis. Folic acid deficiency is associated with DNA hypomethylation, aberrant DNA synthesis and repair, and decreased apoptosis. Furthermore, folate-sensitive fragile sites exist on genes that play an important role in carcinogenesis, particularly the p53 tumor suppressor gene. Folate deficiency may be associated with p53 mutations in ulcerative colitis patients,[12] who are especially prone to folic acid deficiency due to intestinal losses, poor intake of folic acid-containing foods such as leafy green vegetables, and competitive inhibition of absorption from sulfasalazine.[13] Any effects of folic acid deficiency have been partially ameliorated since 1998 by the fortification of flour with folic acid in the United States. A case-control study involving 99 patients with pancolitis was conducted to determine the effect of folate supplementation on the risk of dysplasia or cancer in chronic ulcerative colitis.[13] Results showed that among patients taking folic acid supplements, the risk of developing dysplasia or cancer was diminished, although not significantly (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.12-1.20). Another case-control study performed to better assess the association between folate supplementation and the risk of developing dysplasia or cancer included 67 ulcerative colitis patients enrolled in a cancer surveillance program.[14] In this study, red blood cell folic acid, a measure of medium-term stores, was found to be associated with a chemopreventive effect (OR for each 10-ng/mL increase in red blood cell folate: 0.82, 95% CI 0.68-0.99). Given that these 2 case-control studies had suggested the potential protective effect of folate against neoplasia in ulcerative colitis, a historical cohort study was undertaken to better define this association.[15] This 98-patient cohort study found a nonsignificant protective effect of folic acid supplementation on the risk of cancer or dysplasia (relative risk 0.72, 95% CI 0.28-1.83), but the relative risk for folic acid supplementation on the risk of neoplasia showed a dose-response effect. Finally, in a cohort of 95 patients with long-standing ulcerative colitis who were followed in a cancer surveillance program using immunohistochemical staining for p53 mutations as a complementary test for dysplasia, p53 suppressor gene mutations were found to be associated with cancer or dysplasia (relative risk 4.53, 95% CI 2.16-9.48); folic acid supplementation had a protective effect for p53 mutations (relative risk 0.97, 95% CI 0.94-1.00).[12] Once again, while the evidence may be weak, because folic acid is inexpensive, safe, and recommended for prevention of atherosclerotic heart disease, it should also be recommended for long-term use in patients with IBD. Ursodeoxycholic Acid Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) is often used to improve symptoms and biochemical abnormalities in patients with PSC. Indeed, recent studies have implicated PSC as a risk factor for colorectal cancer in ulcerative colitis.[16] Theoretically, UDCA may be chemopreventive for colorectal cancer in patients with ulcerative colitis. In a cohort study involving 132 ulcerative colitis patients with PSC and 196 ulcerative colitis controls, the risk of developing colorectal cancer or dysplasia was significantly increased among PSC patients (relative risk 3.15, 95% CI 1.37-7.27).[17] It is interesting to note that in this study, all of the excess cancer risk pertained to cancer found proximal to the splenic flexure. In theory, carcinogenic secondary bile acids, such as deoxycholic acid (which is abnormally high in patients with cholestasis), are presented to the right side of the colon in higher concentrations than the left side. Reducing the concentration of these secondary bile acids with UDCA could have chemopreventive effects. To assess the relationship between UDCA use and colonic dysplasia in patients with ulcerative colitis, Tung and colleagues[18] conducted a study involving 59 ulcerative colitis patients with PSC who were undergoing colonoscopic surveillance; 69% were on UDCA. Dysplasia was found in 32% of the UDCA users and in an exceedingly high 72% of UDCA nonusers (OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.03-0.64). In a 52-patient, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial (the only randomized clinical trial done to test for cancer-chemopreventive effects of an agent in ulcerative colitis) designed to test the effect of UDCA use on liver disease progression in PSC, 10% of patients randomized to UDCA developed dysplasia and 35% of placebo-treated patients developed dysplasia (relative risk 0.26, 95% CI 0.07-0.99).[19] Finally, in the only negative study in this setting, 120 PSC patients with ulcerative colitis, 23% of whom were treated with UDCA, were followed by Wolf and colleagues.[20] Over the course of follow-up, 28.6% of UDCA- treated patients developed cancer or dysplasia compared with 29.3% of patients who did not receive UDCA (adjusted relative risk 0.65, 95% CI 0.27-1.55). Once again, although the evidence may be conflicting, because UDCA is recommended for the treatment of PSC, its use should also be encouraged for its possible cancer-chemopreventive effects. Conclusion On the basis of the evidence presented here, patients with ulcerative colitis should be taking a long-term 5-ASA agent for its maintenance effects as well as for its potential cancer-chemopreventive effect. Folic acid supplementation, either 1 mg daily as a sole supplement or 0.4 mg daily in a multivitamin, is also recommended to be certain that ulcerative colitis patients, who are prone to folic acid deficiency, are replete and can benefit from the potential chemopreventive effect. Likewise, ulcerative colitis patients with PSC should be taking UDCA both for the treatment of their liver disease and for possible colon cancer chemoprevention. Certainly, the cancer-chemopreventive effects associated with the use of these medications are insufficient to obviate the need for cancer surveillance colonoscopy. As underscored by the preceding discussion, the studies in cancer chemoprevention supporting these recommendations are currently weak and inconsistent -- however, the many potential benefits associated with the use of these agents should prompt physicians to strongly encourage their use in the setting of ulcerative colitis. References 1. Kane SV, Cohen RD, Aikens JE, Hanauer SB. Prevalence of nonadherence with maintenance mesalamine in quiescent ulcerative colitis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2001;96:2929-2933. 2. Karlen P, Lofberg R, Brostrom O, Leijonmarck CE, Hellers G, Persson PG. Increased risk of cancer in ulcerative colitis: a population-based cohort study. Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;94:1047-1052. 3. Eaden J, Abrams K, Ekbom A, E, Mayberry J. Colorectal cancer prevention in ulcerative colitis: a case-control study. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2000;14:145-153. 4. Allgayer H. Review article: mechanisms of action of mesalazine in preventing colorectal carcinoma in inflammatory bowel disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2003;18:10-14. 5. Pinczowski D, Ekbom A, Baron J, et al. Risk factors for colorectal cancer in patients with ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology. 1994;117-120. 6. Lindberg BU, Broome U, Persson B. Proximal colorectal dysplasia or cancer in ulcerative colitis. Dis Colon Rectum. 2001;44:77-85. 7. Moody GA, Jayanthi V, Probert CS, et al. Long-term therapy with sulfasalazine protects against colorectal cancer in ulcerative colitis. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 1996;8:1179-1183. 8. Eaden J, Abrams K, Ekbom A, et al. Colorectal cancer prevention in ulcerative colitis. Aliment Pharm Ther. 2000;14:145-153. 9. Bernstein CN, Blanchard JF, Metge C, Yogendran M. Does the use of 5-aminosalicylic acid in inflammatory bowel disease prevent the development of colorectal cancer? Am J Gastroenterol. 2003;98:2784- 2788. 10. Rubin DT, LoSavio A, Yadron N, et al. Aminosalicylate therapy in the prevention of dysplasia and colorectal cancer in ulcerative colitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2006;4:1346-1350. 11. Velayos FS, Terdiman JP, Walsh JM. Effect of 5-aminosalicylate use on cancer and dysplasia risk: a systematic review and meta- analysis of observational studies. Am J Gastroenterol. 2005;100:1345- 1353. 12. Lashner BA, Shapiro BD. Husain A, Goldblum JR. Evaluation of the usefulness of testing for p53 mutations in colorectal cancer for ulcerative colitis. Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;94:456-462. 13. Lashner BA, Heidenreich PA, Su GL, et al. Effect of folate supplementation on the incidence of dysplasia and cancer in ulcerative coiltis. Gastroenterology. 1989;97:255-259. 14. Lashner BA. Red blood cell folate is associated with the development of dysplasia and cancer in ulcerative colitis. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 1993;119:549-554. 15. Lashner BA, Provencher KS, Seidner DL, et al. The effect of folic acid on the risk for cancer or dysplasia in ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology. 1997;112:29-32. 16. Soetikno RM, Lin OS, Heidenreich PA, Young HS, Blackstone MO. Increased risk of colorectal neoplasia in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis and ulcerative colitis: a meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2002;56:48-54. 17. Shetty K, Rybicki L, Brzezinski A, Carey WD, Lashner BA. The risk for cancer or dysplasia in ulcerative colitis patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis. Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;94:1643-1649. 18. Tung BY, Emond MJ, Haggitt RC, et al. Ursodiol use is associated with lower prevalence of colonic neoplasia in patients with ulcerative colitis and primary sclerosing cholangitis. Ann Intern Med. 2001;134:89-95. 19. Pardi DS, Loftus EV, Kremers WK, et al. Ursodeoxycholic acid as a chemopreventive agent in patients with ulcerative colitis and primary sclerosing cholangitis. Gastroenterology. 2003;124:889-893. 20. Wolf JM, Rybicki LA, Lashner BA. The impact of ursodeoxycholic acid on cancer, dysplasia, and mortality in ulcerative colitis patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2005;22:783-788. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 > When I told him that Dr. Chapman thought it should be in the drinking water and I asked about the benefit urso has on colon cancer, Lindor said there has been no clinical proof of that. Hi Tim; One of the best reviews I have seen on chemoprevention of colon cancer in ulcerative colitis patients (with and without PSC) is this one attachede below ... an article used for continuing medical education (CME). Basically it encourages use of 5-aminosalicylates, folic acid and ursodeoxycholic acid for colon cancer prevention. Reference 19 in the reference list is one of the studies that support use of ursodeoxycholic acid in colon cancer prevention in PSC patients, and Dr. Lindor was one of the authors of this paper. Therefore, I find it very odd that Dr. Lindor would say that there is no clinical proof of cancer prevention by urso. Best regards, Dave R. _____________________ Advances in Ulcerative Colitis - Volume 3 CME Release Date: December 14, 2007; Valid for credit through December 14, 2008 http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/566843 Expert Column - Ulcerative Colitis and Colorectal Cancer Chemoprevention Bret A. Lashner, MD Introduction Adherence to medical therapy is a major problem in ulcerative colitis, with some estimates showing that up to 60% of patients fail to take their medications as prescribed. Patients should be encouraged by their physicians to adhere to their medical regimen due to the favorable effect on their disease course.[1] What is often overlooked is the possible cancer chemopreventive effect of these medications. Hopefully, careful discussions regarding the beneficial effects of therapies such as 5-aminosalicylic acid (5- ASA/mesalamine), folic acid, and ursodeoxycholic acid, which include their potential chemopreventive effects, will ultimately lead to better adherence and improved patient outcomes. Colorectal cancer is an important problem for ulcerative colitis patients. The lifetime cumulative incidence has been estimated to be between 5.5% and 13.5%.[2] While these rates are not very different from those seen in the general population, the occurrence of cancer at a young age makes age-specific relative risks at least 3 times the baseline rate. The purported risk factors for cancer are extensive disease, long duration of disease, primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC), family history of colorectal cancer, and possibly chronic uncontrolled inflammation. In case-control studies, cancer surveillance has been associated with a decreased risk of dying from cancer, but still rates are sufficiently elevated to make cancer an important concern.[3] Chemoprevention should be considered complementary to cancer surveillance colonoscopy. 5-ASA Agents Due to their anti-inflammatory effects, 5-ASA agents are the most commonly used medications for the treatment of ulcerative colitis. Indeed, 5-ASA therapy represents the current standard of care for mildly to moderately active ulcerative colitis. This class of drugs is also potentially useful for their chemopreventive effects, largely through mechanisms complementary to anti-inflammatory effects. 5-ASA inactivates reactive oxygen species, dampening the inflammatory cascade and inactivating potential carcinogens. By suppressing nuclear factor-kappaB (NF-kB) systems, 5-ASA decreases cytokine production while increasing NF-kB-dependent apoptosis or programmed cell death of cells with abnormal DNA. Additionally, 5-ASA is also known to decrease interleukin (IL)-2 production, which in turn will diminish clonal proliferation of T cells. Finally, 5-ASA activates peroxisome proliferator-activator receptor (PPAR)-gamma, which demonstrates both antiproliferative and anti-inflammatory effects.[4] Six epidemiologic studies have specifically looked at the potential of 5-ASA as a chemopreventive agent for colorectal cancer in ulcerative colitis; 4 have shown a positive effect and 2 have shown no effect.[5-10] A case-control study from Uppsala, Sweden, compared 102 ulcerative colitis patients with cancer to 196 matched controls without cancer.[5] Results showed that the use of sulfasalazine, a prodrug of 5-ASA, given for at least 3 months, was associated with a significantly diminished risk of developing cancer (odds ratio [OR] 0.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.20-0.69). Cigarette smoking and active ulcerative colitis also had independent protective effects. In a cohort study from Huddinge, Sweden, involving 143 patients with ulcerative colitis who underwent regular colonoscopies and multiple biopsies in a 20-year surveillance program, 36% developed cancer or dysplasia over the course of follow-up.[6] Among patients who received sulfasalazine for at least 6 months, there was a 34% rate of colorectal dysplasia/cancer compared with a 44% rate among patients who were taking sulfasalazine for less than 6 months (not significant). In a cohort study of colorectal cancer risk and treatment adherence conducted at Leicester General Hospital in the United Kingdom involving 175 patients with ulcerative colitis, 5.7% developed cancer within the study period.[7] Among those patients who took sulfasalazine for at least 6 months, the relative risk of developing colorectal cancer was 0.11 (95% CI 0.04-0.28). Alternatively, a case- control study from the United Kingdom comparing 102 ulcerative colitis patients with cancer to matched controls found that sulfasalazine had no significant protective effect; however, regular therapy with other 5-ASA agents was associated with a chemopreventive effect (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.06-0.61).[8] In another study assessing whether 5-ASA use can prevent the development of colorectal cancer in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), Bernstein and colleagues[9] identified 25 cases of IBD with a diagnosis of colorectal cancer between the years 1997 and 2000 from the University of Manitoba Inflammatory Bowel Disease Epidemiology Database. These cases were compared to 348 matched controls (a control group of IBD patients who did not develop colorectal cancer) extracted from this same database. They found that among the cases of ulcerative colitis with colorectal cancer, 45% were 5-ASA users, whereas only 25% of controls were 5-ASA users (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.07-3.25), and there was no dose-response effect. Higher 5-ASA dosing did not incrementally diminish the rate of colorectal cancer development. More recently, a case-control study from the University of Chicago by Rubin and colleagues[10] compared 26 ulcerative colitis patients with cancer or dysplasia to 96 matched controls and found that use of 5-ASA >= 1.2 g daily was associated with a significant chemopreventive effect (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.09-0.85); there was a significant dose-response. A meta-analysis examining these studies and others that have principally looked at agents other than 5-ASA (such as folic acid, immunosuppressives, and corticosteroids) has revealed a significant chemopreventive effect of 5-ASA, even after adjusting for potential confounders (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.29-0.92) on colorectal cancer or dysplasia.[11] Therefore, even though the evidence for chemoprevention may be equivocal, because 5-ASA is also effective in maintaining disease remission, these agents should be recommended for long-term use in patients with ulcerative colitis. Folic Acid Folic acid is essential for the regeneration of the amino acid methionine, which is needed for both purine and pyrimidine biosynthesis. Folic acid deficiency is associated with DNA hypomethylation, aberrant DNA synthesis and repair, and decreased apoptosis. Furthermore, folate-sensitive fragile sites exist on genes that play an important role in carcinogenesis, particularly the p53 tumor suppressor gene. Folate deficiency may be associated with p53 mutations in ulcerative colitis patients,[12] who are especially prone to folic acid deficiency due to intestinal losses, poor intake of folic acid-containing foods such as leafy green vegetables, and competitive inhibition of absorption from sulfasalazine.[13] Any effects of folic acid deficiency have been partially ameliorated since 1998 by the fortification of flour with folic acid in the United States. A case-control study involving 99 patients with pancolitis was conducted to determine the effect of folate supplementation on the risk of dysplasia or cancer in chronic ulcerative colitis.[13] Results showed that among patients taking folic acid supplements, the risk of developing dysplasia or cancer was diminished, although not significantly (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.12-1.20). Another case-control study performed to better assess the association between folate supplementation and the risk of developing dysplasia or cancer included 67 ulcerative colitis patients enrolled in a cancer surveillance program.[14] In this study, red blood cell folic acid, a measure of medium-term stores, was found to be associated with a chemopreventive effect (OR for each 10-ng/mL increase in red blood cell folate: 0.82, 95% CI 0.68-0.99). Given that these 2 case-control studies had suggested the potential protective effect of folate against neoplasia in ulcerative colitis, a historical cohort study was undertaken to better define this association.[15] This 98-patient cohort study found a nonsignificant protective effect of folic acid supplementation on the risk of cancer or dysplasia (relative risk 0.72, 95% CI 0.28-1.83), but the relative risk for folic acid supplementation on the risk of neoplasia showed a dose-response effect. Finally, in a cohort of 95 patients with long-standing ulcerative colitis who were followed in a cancer surveillance program using immunohistochemical staining for p53 mutations as a complementary test for dysplasia, p53 suppressor gene mutations were found to be associated with cancer or dysplasia (relative risk 4.53, 95% CI 2.16-9.48); folic acid supplementation had a protective effect for p53 mutations (relative risk 0.97, 95% CI 0.94-1.00).[12] Once again, while the evidence may be weak, because folic acid is inexpensive, safe, and recommended for prevention of atherosclerotic heart disease, it should also be recommended for long-term use in patients with IBD. Ursodeoxycholic Acid Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) is often used to improve symptoms and biochemical abnormalities in patients with PSC. Indeed, recent studies have implicated PSC as a risk factor for colorectal cancer in ulcerative colitis.[16] Theoretically, UDCA may be chemopreventive for colorectal cancer in patients with ulcerative colitis. In a cohort study involving 132 ulcerative colitis patients with PSC and 196 ulcerative colitis controls, the risk of developing colorectal cancer or dysplasia was significantly increased among PSC patients (relative risk 3.15, 95% CI 1.37-7.27).[17] It is interesting to note that in this study, all of the excess cancer risk pertained to cancer found proximal to the splenic flexure. In theory, carcinogenic secondary bile acids, such as deoxycholic acid (which is abnormally high in patients with cholestasis), are presented to the right side of the colon in higher concentrations than the left side. Reducing the concentration of these secondary bile acids with UDCA could have chemopreventive effects. To assess the relationship between UDCA use and colonic dysplasia in patients with ulcerative colitis, Tung and colleagues[18] conducted a study involving 59 ulcerative colitis patients with PSC who were undergoing colonoscopic surveillance; 69% were on UDCA. Dysplasia was found in 32% of the UDCA users and in an exceedingly high 72% of UDCA nonusers (OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.03-0.64). In a 52-patient, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial (the only randomized clinical trial done to test for cancer-chemopreventive effects of an agent in ulcerative colitis) designed to test the effect of UDCA use on liver disease progression in PSC, 10% of patients randomized to UDCA developed dysplasia and 35% of placebo-treated patients developed dysplasia (relative risk 0.26, 95% CI 0.07-0.99).[19] Finally, in the only negative study in this setting, 120 PSC patients with ulcerative colitis, 23% of whom were treated with UDCA, were followed by Wolf and colleagues.[20] Over the course of follow-up, 28.6% of UDCA- treated patients developed cancer or dysplasia compared with 29.3% of patients who did not receive UDCA (adjusted relative risk 0.65, 95% CI 0.27-1.55). Once again, although the evidence may be conflicting, because UDCA is recommended for the treatment of PSC, its use should also be encouraged for its possible cancer-chemopreventive effects. Conclusion On the basis of the evidence presented here, patients with ulcerative colitis should be taking a long-term 5-ASA agent for its maintenance effects as well as for its potential cancer-chemopreventive effect. Folic acid supplementation, either 1 mg daily as a sole supplement or 0.4 mg daily in a multivitamin, is also recommended to be certain that ulcerative colitis patients, who are prone to folic acid deficiency, are replete and can benefit from the potential chemopreventive effect. Likewise, ulcerative colitis patients with PSC should be taking UDCA both for the treatment of their liver disease and for possible colon cancer chemoprevention. Certainly, the cancer-chemopreventive effects associated with the use of these medications are insufficient to obviate the need for cancer surveillance colonoscopy. As underscored by the preceding discussion, the studies in cancer chemoprevention supporting these recommendations are currently weak and inconsistent -- however, the many potential benefits associated with the use of these agents should prompt physicians to strongly encourage their use in the setting of ulcerative colitis. References 1. Kane SV, Cohen RD, Aikens JE, Hanauer SB. Prevalence of nonadherence with maintenance mesalamine in quiescent ulcerative colitis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2001;96:2929-2933. 2. Karlen P, Lofberg R, Brostrom O, Leijonmarck CE, Hellers G, Persson PG. Increased risk of cancer in ulcerative colitis: a population-based cohort study. Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;94:1047-1052. 3. Eaden J, Abrams K, Ekbom A, E, Mayberry J. Colorectal cancer prevention in ulcerative colitis: a case-control study. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2000;14:145-153. 4. Allgayer H. Review article: mechanisms of action of mesalazine in preventing colorectal carcinoma in inflammatory bowel disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2003;18:10-14. 5. Pinczowski D, Ekbom A, Baron J, et al. Risk factors for colorectal cancer in patients with ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology. 1994;117-120. 6. Lindberg BU, Broome U, Persson B. Proximal colorectal dysplasia or cancer in ulcerative colitis. Dis Colon Rectum. 2001;44:77-85. 7. Moody GA, Jayanthi V, Probert CS, et al. Long-term therapy with sulfasalazine protects against colorectal cancer in ulcerative colitis. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 1996;8:1179-1183. 8. Eaden J, Abrams K, Ekbom A, et al. Colorectal cancer prevention in ulcerative colitis. Aliment Pharm Ther. 2000;14:145-153. 9. Bernstein CN, Blanchard JF, Metge C, Yogendran M. Does the use of 5-aminosalicylic acid in inflammatory bowel disease prevent the development of colorectal cancer? Am J Gastroenterol. 2003;98:2784- 2788. 10. Rubin DT, LoSavio A, Yadron N, et al. Aminosalicylate therapy in the prevention of dysplasia and colorectal cancer in ulcerative colitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2006;4:1346-1350. 11. Velayos FS, Terdiman JP, Walsh JM. Effect of 5-aminosalicylate use on cancer and dysplasia risk: a systematic review and meta- analysis of observational studies. Am J Gastroenterol. 2005;100:1345- 1353. 12. Lashner BA, Shapiro BD. Husain A, Goldblum JR. Evaluation of the usefulness of testing for p53 mutations in colorectal cancer for ulcerative colitis. Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;94:456-462. 13. Lashner BA, Heidenreich PA, Su GL, et al. Effect of folate supplementation on the incidence of dysplasia and cancer in ulcerative coiltis. Gastroenterology. 1989;97:255-259. 14. Lashner BA. Red blood cell folate is associated with the development of dysplasia and cancer in ulcerative colitis. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 1993;119:549-554. 15. Lashner BA, Provencher KS, Seidner DL, et al. The effect of folic acid on the risk for cancer or dysplasia in ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology. 1997;112:29-32. 16. Soetikno RM, Lin OS, Heidenreich PA, Young HS, Blackstone MO. Increased risk of colorectal neoplasia in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis and ulcerative colitis: a meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2002;56:48-54. 17. Shetty K, Rybicki L, Brzezinski A, Carey WD, Lashner BA. The risk for cancer or dysplasia in ulcerative colitis patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis. Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;94:1643-1649. 18. Tung BY, Emond MJ, Haggitt RC, et al. Ursodiol use is associated with lower prevalence of colonic neoplasia in patients with ulcerative colitis and primary sclerosing cholangitis. Ann Intern Med. 2001;134:89-95. 19. Pardi DS, Loftus EV, Kremers WK, et al. Ursodeoxycholic acid as a chemopreventive agent in patients with ulcerative colitis and primary sclerosing cholangitis. Gastroenterology. 2003;124:889-893. 20. Wolf JM, Rybicki LA, Lashner BA. The impact of ursodeoxycholic acid on cancer, dysplasia, and mortality in ulcerative colitis patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2005;22:783-788. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 > When I told him that Dr. Chapman thought it should be in the drinking water and I asked about the benefit urso has on colon cancer, Lindor said there has been no clinical proof of that. Hi Tim; One of the best reviews I have seen on chemoprevention of colon cancer in ulcerative colitis patients (with and without PSC) is this one attachede below ... an article used for continuing medical education (CME). Basically it encourages use of 5-aminosalicylates, folic acid and ursodeoxycholic acid for colon cancer prevention. Reference 19 in the reference list is one of the studies that support use of ursodeoxycholic acid in colon cancer prevention in PSC patients, and Dr. Lindor was one of the authors of this paper. Therefore, I find it very odd that Dr. Lindor would say that there is no clinical proof of cancer prevention by urso. Best regards, Dave R. _____________________ Advances in Ulcerative Colitis - Volume 3 CME Release Date: December 14, 2007; Valid for credit through December 14, 2008 http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/566843 Expert Column - Ulcerative Colitis and Colorectal Cancer Chemoprevention Bret A. Lashner, MD Introduction Adherence to medical therapy is a major problem in ulcerative colitis, with some estimates showing that up to 60% of patients fail to take their medications as prescribed. Patients should be encouraged by their physicians to adhere to their medical regimen due to the favorable effect on their disease course.[1] What is often overlooked is the possible cancer chemopreventive effect of these medications. Hopefully, careful discussions regarding the beneficial effects of therapies such as 5-aminosalicylic acid (5- ASA/mesalamine), folic acid, and ursodeoxycholic acid, which include their potential chemopreventive effects, will ultimately lead to better adherence and improved patient outcomes. Colorectal cancer is an important problem for ulcerative colitis patients. The lifetime cumulative incidence has been estimated to be between 5.5% and 13.5%.[2] While these rates are not very different from those seen in the general population, the occurrence of cancer at a young age makes age-specific relative risks at least 3 times the baseline rate. The purported risk factors for cancer are extensive disease, long duration of disease, primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC), family history of colorectal cancer, and possibly chronic uncontrolled inflammation. In case-control studies, cancer surveillance has been associated with a decreased risk of dying from cancer, but still rates are sufficiently elevated to make cancer an important concern.[3] Chemoprevention should be considered complementary to cancer surveillance colonoscopy. 5-ASA Agents Due to their anti-inflammatory effects, 5-ASA agents are the most commonly used medications for the treatment of ulcerative colitis. Indeed, 5-ASA therapy represents the current standard of care for mildly to moderately active ulcerative colitis. This class of drugs is also potentially useful for their chemopreventive effects, largely through mechanisms complementary to anti-inflammatory effects. 5-ASA inactivates reactive oxygen species, dampening the inflammatory cascade and inactivating potential carcinogens. By suppressing nuclear factor-kappaB (NF-kB) systems, 5-ASA decreases cytokine production while increasing NF-kB-dependent apoptosis or programmed cell death of cells with abnormal DNA. Additionally, 5-ASA is also known to decrease interleukin (IL)-2 production, which in turn will diminish clonal proliferation of T cells. Finally, 5-ASA activates peroxisome proliferator-activator receptor (PPAR)-gamma, which demonstrates both antiproliferative and anti-inflammatory effects.[4] Six epidemiologic studies have specifically looked at the potential of 5-ASA as a chemopreventive agent for colorectal cancer in ulcerative colitis; 4 have shown a positive effect and 2 have shown no effect.[5-10] A case-control study from Uppsala, Sweden, compared 102 ulcerative colitis patients with cancer to 196 matched controls without cancer.[5] Results showed that the use of sulfasalazine, a prodrug of 5-ASA, given for at least 3 months, was associated with a significantly diminished risk of developing cancer (odds ratio [OR] 0.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.20-0.69). Cigarette smoking and active ulcerative colitis also had independent protective effects. In a cohort study from Huddinge, Sweden, involving 143 patients with ulcerative colitis who underwent regular colonoscopies and multiple biopsies in a 20-year surveillance program, 36% developed cancer or dysplasia over the course of follow-up.[6] Among patients who received sulfasalazine for at least 6 months, there was a 34% rate of colorectal dysplasia/cancer compared with a 44% rate among patients who were taking sulfasalazine for less than 6 months (not significant). In a cohort study of colorectal cancer risk and treatment adherence conducted at Leicester General Hospital in the United Kingdom involving 175 patients with ulcerative colitis, 5.7% developed cancer within the study period.[7] Among those patients who took sulfasalazine for at least 6 months, the relative risk of developing colorectal cancer was 0.11 (95% CI 0.04-0.28). Alternatively, a case- control study from the United Kingdom comparing 102 ulcerative colitis patients with cancer to matched controls found that sulfasalazine had no significant protective effect; however, regular therapy with other 5-ASA agents was associated with a chemopreventive effect (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.06-0.61).[8] In another study assessing whether 5-ASA use can prevent the development of colorectal cancer in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), Bernstein and colleagues[9] identified 25 cases of IBD with a diagnosis of colorectal cancer between the years 1997 and 2000 from the University of Manitoba Inflammatory Bowel Disease Epidemiology Database. These cases were compared to 348 matched controls (a control group of IBD patients who did not develop colorectal cancer) extracted from this same database. They found that among the cases of ulcerative colitis with colorectal cancer, 45% were 5-ASA users, whereas only 25% of controls were 5-ASA users (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.07-3.25), and there was no dose-response effect. Higher 5-ASA dosing did not incrementally diminish the rate of colorectal cancer development. More recently, a case-control study from the University of Chicago by Rubin and colleagues[10] compared 26 ulcerative colitis patients with cancer or dysplasia to 96 matched controls and found that use of 5-ASA >= 1.2 g daily was associated with a significant chemopreventive effect (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.09-0.85); there was a significant dose-response. A meta-analysis examining these studies and others that have principally looked at agents other than 5-ASA (such as folic acid, immunosuppressives, and corticosteroids) has revealed a significant chemopreventive effect of 5-ASA, even after adjusting for potential confounders (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.29-0.92) on colorectal cancer or dysplasia.[11] Therefore, even though the evidence for chemoprevention may be equivocal, because 5-ASA is also effective in maintaining disease remission, these agents should be recommended for long-term use in patients with ulcerative colitis. Folic Acid Folic acid is essential for the regeneration of the amino acid methionine, which is needed for both purine and pyrimidine biosynthesis. Folic acid deficiency is associated with DNA hypomethylation, aberrant DNA synthesis and repair, and decreased apoptosis. Furthermore, folate-sensitive fragile sites exist on genes that play an important role in carcinogenesis, particularly the p53 tumor suppressor gene. Folate deficiency may be associated with p53 mutations in ulcerative colitis patients,[12] who are especially prone to folic acid deficiency due to intestinal losses, poor intake of folic acid-containing foods such as leafy green vegetables, and competitive inhibition of absorption from sulfasalazine.[13] Any effects of folic acid deficiency have been partially ameliorated since 1998 by the fortification of flour with folic acid in the United States. A case-control study involving 99 patients with pancolitis was conducted to determine the effect of folate supplementation on the risk of dysplasia or cancer in chronic ulcerative colitis.[13] Results showed that among patients taking folic acid supplements, the risk of developing dysplasia or cancer was diminished, although not significantly (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.12-1.20). Another case-control study performed to better assess the association between folate supplementation and the risk of developing dysplasia or cancer included 67 ulcerative colitis patients enrolled in a cancer surveillance program.[14] In this study, red blood cell folic acid, a measure of medium-term stores, was found to be associated with a chemopreventive effect (OR for each 10-ng/mL increase in red blood cell folate: 0.82, 95% CI 0.68-0.99). Given that these 2 case-control studies had suggested the potential protective effect of folate against neoplasia in ulcerative colitis, a historical cohort study was undertaken to better define this association.[15] This 98-patient cohort study found a nonsignificant protective effect of folic acid supplementation on the risk of cancer or dysplasia (relative risk 0.72, 95% CI 0.28-1.83), but the relative risk for folic acid supplementation on the risk of neoplasia showed a dose-response effect. Finally, in a cohort of 95 patients with long-standing ulcerative colitis who were followed in a cancer surveillance program using immunohistochemical staining for p53 mutations as a complementary test for dysplasia, p53 suppressor gene mutations were found to be associated with cancer or dysplasia (relative risk 4.53, 95% CI 2.16-9.48); folic acid supplementation had a protective effect for p53 mutations (relative risk 0.97, 95% CI 0.94-1.00).[12] Once again, while the evidence may be weak, because folic acid is inexpensive, safe, and recommended for prevention of atherosclerotic heart disease, it should also be recommended for long-term use in patients with IBD. Ursodeoxycholic Acid Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) is often used to improve symptoms and biochemical abnormalities in patients with PSC. Indeed, recent studies have implicated PSC as a risk factor for colorectal cancer in ulcerative colitis.[16] Theoretically, UDCA may be chemopreventive for colorectal cancer in patients with ulcerative colitis. In a cohort study involving 132 ulcerative colitis patients with PSC and 196 ulcerative colitis controls, the risk of developing colorectal cancer or dysplasia was significantly increased among PSC patients (relative risk 3.15, 95% CI 1.37-7.27).[17] It is interesting to note that in this study, all of the excess cancer risk pertained to cancer found proximal to the splenic flexure. In theory, carcinogenic secondary bile acids, such as deoxycholic acid (which is abnormally high in patients with cholestasis), are presented to the right side of the colon in higher concentrations than the left side. Reducing the concentration of these secondary bile acids with UDCA could have chemopreventive effects. To assess the relationship between UDCA use and colonic dysplasia in patients with ulcerative colitis, Tung and colleagues[18] conducted a study involving 59 ulcerative colitis patients with PSC who were undergoing colonoscopic surveillance; 69% were on UDCA. Dysplasia was found in 32% of the UDCA users and in an exceedingly high 72% of UDCA nonusers (OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.03-0.64). In a 52-patient, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial (the only randomized clinical trial done to test for cancer-chemopreventive effects of an agent in ulcerative colitis) designed to test the effect of UDCA use on liver disease progression in PSC, 10% of patients randomized to UDCA developed dysplasia and 35% of placebo-treated patients developed dysplasia (relative risk 0.26, 95% CI 0.07-0.99).[19] Finally, in the only negative study in this setting, 120 PSC patients with ulcerative colitis, 23% of whom were treated with UDCA, were followed by Wolf and colleagues.[20] Over the course of follow-up, 28.6% of UDCA- treated patients developed cancer or dysplasia compared with 29.3% of patients who did not receive UDCA (adjusted relative risk 0.65, 95% CI 0.27-1.55). Once again, although the evidence may be conflicting, because UDCA is recommended for the treatment of PSC, its use should also be encouraged for its possible cancer-chemopreventive effects. Conclusion On the basis of the evidence presented here, patients with ulcerative colitis should be taking a long-term 5-ASA agent for its maintenance effects as well as for its potential cancer-chemopreventive effect. Folic acid supplementation, either 1 mg daily as a sole supplement or 0.4 mg daily in a multivitamin, is also recommended to be certain that ulcerative colitis patients, who are prone to folic acid deficiency, are replete and can benefit from the potential chemopreventive effect. Likewise, ulcerative colitis patients with PSC should be taking UDCA both for the treatment of their liver disease and for possible colon cancer chemoprevention. Certainly, the cancer-chemopreventive effects associated with the use of these medications are insufficient to obviate the need for cancer surveillance colonoscopy. As underscored by the preceding discussion, the studies in cancer chemoprevention supporting these recommendations are currently weak and inconsistent -- however, the many potential benefits associated with the use of these agents should prompt physicians to strongly encourage their use in the setting of ulcerative colitis. References 1. Kane SV, Cohen RD, Aikens JE, Hanauer SB. Prevalence of nonadherence with maintenance mesalamine in quiescent ulcerative colitis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2001;96:2929-2933. 2. Karlen P, Lofberg R, Brostrom O, Leijonmarck CE, Hellers G, Persson PG. Increased risk of cancer in ulcerative colitis: a population-based cohort study. Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;94:1047-1052. 3. Eaden J, Abrams K, Ekbom A, E, Mayberry J. Colorectal cancer prevention in ulcerative colitis: a case-control study. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2000;14:145-153. 4. Allgayer H. Review article: mechanisms of action of mesalazine in preventing colorectal carcinoma in inflammatory bowel disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2003;18:10-14. 5. Pinczowski D, Ekbom A, Baron J, et al. Risk factors for colorectal cancer in patients with ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology. 1994;117-120. 6. Lindberg BU, Broome U, Persson B. Proximal colorectal dysplasia or cancer in ulcerative colitis. Dis Colon Rectum. 2001;44:77-85. 7. Moody GA, Jayanthi V, Probert CS, et al. Long-term therapy with sulfasalazine protects against colorectal cancer in ulcerative colitis. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 1996;8:1179-1183. 8. Eaden J, Abrams K, Ekbom A, et al. Colorectal cancer prevention in ulcerative colitis. Aliment Pharm Ther. 2000;14:145-153. 9. Bernstein CN, Blanchard JF, Metge C, Yogendran M. Does the use of 5-aminosalicylic acid in inflammatory bowel disease prevent the development of colorectal cancer? Am J Gastroenterol. 2003;98:2784- 2788. 10. Rubin DT, LoSavio A, Yadron N, et al. Aminosalicylate therapy in the prevention of dysplasia and colorectal cancer in ulcerative colitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2006;4:1346-1350. 11. Velayos FS, Terdiman JP, Walsh JM. Effect of 5-aminosalicylate use on cancer and dysplasia risk: a systematic review and meta- analysis of observational studies. Am J Gastroenterol. 2005;100:1345- 1353. 12. Lashner BA, Shapiro BD. Husain A, Goldblum JR. Evaluation of the usefulness of testing for p53 mutations in colorectal cancer for ulcerative colitis. Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;94:456-462. 13. Lashner BA, Heidenreich PA, Su GL, et al. Effect of folate supplementation on the incidence of dysplasia and cancer in ulcerative coiltis. Gastroenterology. 1989;97:255-259. 14. Lashner BA. Red blood cell folate is associated with the development of dysplasia and cancer in ulcerative colitis. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 1993;119:549-554. 15. Lashner BA, Provencher KS, Seidner DL, et al. The effect of folic acid on the risk for cancer or dysplasia in ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology. 1997;112:29-32. 16. Soetikno RM, Lin OS, Heidenreich PA, Young HS, Blackstone MO. Increased risk of colorectal neoplasia in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis and ulcerative colitis: a meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2002;56:48-54. 17. Shetty K, Rybicki L, Brzezinski A, Carey WD, Lashner BA. The risk for cancer or dysplasia in ulcerative colitis patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis. Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;94:1643-1649. 18. Tung BY, Emond MJ, Haggitt RC, et al. Ursodiol use is associated with lower prevalence of colonic neoplasia in patients with ulcerative colitis and primary sclerosing cholangitis. Ann Intern Med. 2001;134:89-95. 19. Pardi DS, Loftus EV, Kremers WK, et al. Ursodeoxycholic acid as a chemopreventive agent in patients with ulcerative colitis and primary sclerosing cholangitis. Gastroenterology. 2003;124:889-893. 20. Wolf JM, Rybicki LA, Lashner BA. The impact of ursodeoxycholic acid on cancer, dysplasia, and mortality in ulcerative colitis patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2005;22:783-788. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 My GI doctor at Mayo (Dr. Sandbourne) put me on Asacol 1.6 g per day for cancer prevention for UC (I still have about 6 inches of my colon left). Ruth UC-2000, Colectomy-2007, PSC-2008 > > When I told him that Dr. Chapman thought it should be in the > drinking water and I asked about the benefit urso has on colon > cancer, Lindor said there has been no clinical proof of that. > > > Hi Tim; > > One of the best reviews I have seen on chemoprevention of colon > cancer in ulcerative colitis patients (with and without PSC) is this > one attachede below ... an article used for continuing medical > education (CME). Basically it encourages use of 5-aminosalicylates, > folic acid and ursodeoxycholic acid for colon cancer prevention. > Reference 19 in the reference list is one of the studies that support > use of ursodeoxycholic acid in colon cancer prevention in PSC > patients, and Dr. Lindor was one of the authors of this paper. > Therefore, I find it very odd that Dr. Lindor would say that there is > no clinical proof of cancer prevention by urso. > > Best regards, > > Dave R. > > _____________________ > > Advances in Ulcerative Colitis - Volume 3 CME > > Release Date: December 14, 2007; Valid for credit through December > 14, 2008 > > http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/566843 > > Expert Column - Ulcerative Colitis and Colorectal Cancer > Chemoprevention > > Bret A. Lashner, MD > > Introduction > > Adherence to medical therapy is a major problem in ulcerative > colitis, with some estimates showing that up to 60% of patients fail > to take their medications as prescribed. Patients should be > encouraged by their physicians to adhere to their medical regimen due > to the favorable effect on their disease course.[1] What is often > overlooked is the possible cancer chemopreventive effect of these > medications. Hopefully, careful discussions regarding the beneficial > effects of therapies such as 5-aminosalicylic acid (5- > ASA/mesalamine), folic acid, and ursodeoxycholic acid, which include > their potential chemopreventive effects, will ultimately lead to > better adherence and improved patient outcomes. > > Colorectal cancer is an important problem for ulcerative colitis > patients. The lifetime cumulative incidence has been estimated to be > between 5.5% and 13.5%.[2] While these rates are not very different > from those seen in the general population, the occurrence of cancer > at a young age makes age-specific relative risks at least 3 times the > baseline rate. The purported risk factors for cancer are extensive > disease, long duration of disease, primary sclerosing cholangitis > (PSC), family history of colorectal cancer, and possibly chronic > uncontrolled inflammation. In case-control studies, cancer > surveillance has been associated with a decreased risk of dying from > cancer, but still rates are sufficiently elevated to make cancer an > important concern.[3] Chemoprevention should be considered > complementary to cancer surveillance colonoscopy. > > 5-ASA Agents > > Due to their anti-inflammatory effects, 5-ASA agents are the most > commonly used medications for the treatment of ulcerative colitis. > Indeed, 5-ASA therapy represents the current standard of care for > mildly to moderately active ulcerative colitis. This class of drugs > is also potentially useful for their chemopreventive effects, largely > through mechanisms complementary to anti-inflammatory effects. 5- ASA > inactivates reactive oxygen species, dampening the inflammatory > cascade and inactivating potential carcinogens. By suppressing > nuclear factor-kappaB (NF-kB) systems, 5-ASA decreases cytokine > production while increasing NF-kB-dependent apoptosis or programmed > cell death of cells with abnormal DNA. Additionally, 5-ASA is also > known to decrease interleukin (IL)-2 production, which in turn will > diminish clonal proliferation of T cells. Finally, 5-ASA activates > peroxisome proliferator-activator receptor (PPAR)-gamma, which > demonstrates both antiproliferative and anti-inflammatory effects. [4] > > Six epidemiologic studies have specifically looked at the potential > of 5-ASA as a chemopreventive agent for colorectal cancer in > ulcerative colitis; 4 have shown a positive effect and 2 have shown > no effect.[5-10] A case-control study from Uppsala, Sweden, compared > 102 ulcerative colitis patients with cancer to 196 matched controls > without cancer.[5] Results showed that the use of sulfasalazine, a > prodrug of 5-ASA, given for at least 3 months, was associated with a > significantly diminished risk of developing cancer (odds ratio [OR] > 0.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.20-0.69). Cigarette smoking and > active ulcerative colitis also had independent protective effects. In > a cohort study from Huddinge, Sweden, involving 143 patients with > ulcerative colitis who underwent regular colonoscopies and multiple > biopsies in a 20-year surveillance program, 36% developed cancer or > dysplasia over the course of follow-up.[6] Among patients who > received sulfasalazine for at least 6 months, there was a 34% rate of > colorectal dysplasia/cancer compared with a 44% rate among patients > who were taking sulfasalazine for less than 6 months (not > significant). > > In a cohort study of colorectal cancer risk and treatment adherence > conducted at Leicester General Hospital in the United Kingdom > involving 175 patients with ulcerative colitis, 5.7% developed cancer > within the study period.[7] Among those patients who took > sulfasalazine for at least 6 months, the relative risk of developing > colorectal cancer was 0.11 (95% CI 0.04-0.28). Alternatively, a case- > control study from the United Kingdom comparing 102 ulcerative > colitis patients with cancer to matched controls found that > sulfasalazine had no significant protective effect; however, regular > therapy with other 5-ASA agents was associated with a chemopreventive > effect (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.06-0.61).[8] In another study assessing > whether 5-ASA use can prevent the development of colorectal cancer in > patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), Bernstein and > colleagues[9] identified 25 cases of IBD with a diagnosis of > colorectal cancer between the years 1997 and 2000 from the University > of Manitoba Inflammatory Bowel Disease Epidemiology Database. These > cases were compared to 348 matched controls (a control group of IBD > patients who did not develop colorectal cancer) extracted from this > same database. They found that among the cases of ulcerative colitis > with colorectal cancer, 45% were 5-ASA users, whereas only 25% of > controls were 5-ASA users (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.07-3.25), and there was > no dose-response effect. Higher 5-ASA dosing did not incrementally > diminish the rate of colorectal cancer development. More recently, a > case-control study from the University of Chicago by Rubin and > colleagues[10] compared 26 ulcerative colitis patients with cancer or > dysplasia to 96 matched controls and found that use of 5-ASA >= 1.2 g > daily was associated with a significant chemopreventive effect (OR > 0.28, 95% CI 0.09-0.85); there was a significant dose-response. A > meta-analysis examining these studies and others that have > principally looked at agents other than 5-ASA (such as folic acid, > immunosuppressives, and corticosteroids) has revealed a significant > chemopreventive effect of 5-ASA, even after adjusting for potential > confounders (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.29-0.92) on colorectal cancer or > dysplasia.[11] > > Therefore, even though the evidence for chemoprevention may be > equivocal, because 5-ASA is also effective in maintaining disease > remission, these agents should be recommended for long-term use in > patients with ulcerative colitis. > > Folic Acid > > Folic acid is essential for the regeneration of the amino acid > methionine, which is needed for both purine and pyrimidine > biosynthesis. Folic acid deficiency is associated with DNA > hypomethylation, aberrant DNA synthesis and repair, and decreased > apoptosis. Furthermore, folate-sensitive fragile sites exist on genes > that play an important role in carcinogenesis, particularly the p53 > tumor suppressor gene. Folate deficiency may be associated with p53 > mutations in ulcerative colitis patients,[12] who are especially > prone to folic acid deficiency due to intestinal losses, poor intake > of folic acid-containing foods such as leafy green vegetables, and > competitive inhibition of absorption from sulfasalazine.[13] Any > effects of folic acid deficiency have been partially ameliorated > since 1998 by the fortification of flour with folic acid in the > United States. > > A case-control study involving 99 patients with pancolitis was > conducted to determine the effect of folate supplementation on the > risk of dysplasia or cancer in chronic ulcerative colitis.[13] > Results showed that among patients taking folic acid supplements, the > risk of developing dysplasia or cancer was diminished, although not > significantly (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.12-1.20). Another case-control study > performed to better assess the association between folate > supplementation and the risk of developing dysplasia or cancer > included 67 ulcerative colitis patients enrolled in a cancer > surveillance program.[14] In this study, red blood cell folic acid, a > measure of medium-term stores, was found to be associated with a > chemopreventive effect (OR for each 10-ng/mL increase in red blood > cell folate: 0.82, 95% CI 0.68-0.99). Given that these 2 case- control > studies had suggested the potential protective effect of folate > against neoplasia in ulcerative colitis, a historical cohort study > was undertaken to better define this association.[15] This 98- patient > cohort study found a nonsignificant protective effect of folic acid > supplementation on the risk of cancer or dysplasia (relative risk > 0.72, 95% CI 0.28-1.83), but the relative risk for folic acid > supplementation on the risk of neoplasia showed a dose-response > effect. Finally, in a cohort of 95 patients with long-standing > ulcerative colitis who were followed in a cancer surveillance program > using immunohistochemical staining for p53 mutations as a > complementary test for dysplasia, p53 suppressor gene mutations were > found to be associated with cancer or dysplasia (relative risk 4.53, > 95% CI 2.16-9.48); folic acid supplementation had a protective effect > for p53 mutations (relative risk 0.97, 95% CI 0.94-1.00).[12] > > Once again, while the evidence may be weak, because folic acid is > inexpensive, safe, and recommended for prevention of atherosclerotic > heart disease, it should also be recommended for long-term use in > patients with IBD. > > Ursodeoxycholic Acid > > Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) is often used to improve symptoms and > biochemical abnormalities in patients with PSC. Indeed, recent > studies have implicated PSC as a risk factor for colorectal cancer in > ulcerative colitis.[16] Theoretically, UDCA may be chemopreventive > for colorectal cancer in patients with ulcerative colitis. In a > cohort study involving 132 ulcerative colitis patients with PSC and > 196 ulcerative colitis controls, the risk of developing colorectal > cancer or dysplasia was significantly increased among PSC patients > (relative risk 3.15, 95% CI 1.37-7.27).[17] It is interesting to note > that in this study, all of the excess cancer risk pertained to cancer > found proximal to the splenic flexure. In theory, carcinogenic > secondary bile acids, such as deoxycholic acid (which is abnormally > high in patients with cholestasis), are presented to the right side > of the colon in higher concentrations than the left side. Reducing > the concentration of these secondary bile acids with UDCA could have > chemopreventive effects. > > To assess the relationship between UDCA use and colonic dysplasia in > patients with ulcerative colitis, Tung and colleagues[18] conducted a > study involving 59 ulcerative colitis patients with PSC who were > undergoing colonoscopic surveillance; 69% were on UDCA. Dysplasia was > found in 32% of the UDCA users and in an exceedingly high 72% of UDCA > nonusers (OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.03-0.64). In a 52-patient, randomized, > placebo-controlled clinical trial (the only randomized clinical trial > done to test for cancer-chemopreventive effects of an agent in > ulcerative colitis) designed to test the effect of UDCA use on liver > disease progression in PSC, 10% of patients randomized to UDCA > developed dysplasia and 35% of placebo-treated patients developed > dysplasia (relative risk 0.26, 95% CI 0.07-0.99).[19] Finally, in the > only negative study in this setting, 120 PSC patients with ulcerative > colitis, 23% of whom were treated with UDCA, were followed by Wolf > and colleagues.[20] Over the course of follow-up, 28.6% of UDCA- > treated patients developed cancer or dysplasia compared with 29.3% of > patients who did not receive UDCA (adjusted relative risk 0.65, 95% > CI 0.27-1.55). > > Once again, although the evidence may be conflicting, because UDCA is > recommended for the treatment of PSC, its use should also be > encouraged for its possible cancer-chemopreventive effects. > > Conclusion > > On the basis of the evidence presented here, patients with ulcerative > colitis should be taking a long-term 5-ASA agent for its maintenance > effects as well as for its potential cancer-chemopreventive effect. > Folic acid supplementation, either 1 mg daily as a sole supplement or > 0.4 mg daily in a multivitamin, is also recommended to be certain > that ulcerative colitis patients, who are prone to folic acid > deficiency, are replete and can benefit from the potential > chemopreventive effect. Likewise, ulcerative colitis patients with > PSC should be taking UDCA both for the treatment of their liver > disease and for possible colon cancer chemoprevention. Certainly, the > cancer-chemopreventive effects associated with the use of these > medications are insufficient to obviate the need for cancer > surveillance colonoscopy. As underscored by the preceding discussion, > the studies in cancer chemoprevention supporting these > recommendations are currently weak and inconsistent -- however, the > many potential benefits associated with the use of these agents > should prompt physicians to strongly encourage their use in the > setting of ulcerative colitis. > > References > > 1. Kane SV, Cohen RD, Aikens JE, Hanauer SB. Prevalence of > nonadherence with maintenance mesalamine in quiescent ulcerative > colitis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2001;96:2929-2933. > > 2. Karlen P, Lofberg R, Brostrom O, Leijonmarck CE, Hellers G, > Persson PG. Increased risk of cancer in ulcerative colitis: a > population-based cohort study. Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;94:1047- 1052. > > 3. Eaden J, Abrams K, Ekbom A, E, Mayberry J. Colorectal > cancer prevention in ulcerative colitis: a case-control study. > Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2000;14:145-153. > > 4. Allgayer H. Review article: mechanisms of action of mesalazine in > preventing colorectal carcinoma in inflammatory bowel disease. > Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2003;18:10-14. > > 5. Pinczowski D, Ekbom A, Baron J, et al. Risk factors for colorectal > cancer in patients with ulcerative colitis. Gastroenterology. > 1994;117-120. > > 6. Lindberg BU, Broome U, Persson B. Proximal colorectal dysplasia or > cancer in ulcerative colitis. Dis Colon Rectum. 2001;44:77-85. > > 7. Moody GA, Jayanthi V, Probert CS, et al. Long-term therapy with > sulfasalazine protects against colorectal cancer in ulcerative > colitis. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 1996;8:1179-1183. > > 8. Eaden J, Abrams K, Ekbom A, et al. Colorectal cancer prevention in > ulcerative colitis. Aliment Pharm Ther. 2000;14:145-153. > > 9. Bernstein CN, Blanchard JF, Metge C, Yogendran M. Does the use of > 5-aminosalicylic acid in inflammatory bowel disease prevent the > development of colorectal cancer? Am J Gastroenterol. 2003;98:2784- > 2788. > > 10. Rubin DT, LoSavio A, Yadron N, et al. Aminosalicylate therapy in > the prevention of dysplasia and colorectal cancer in ulcerative > colitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2006;4:1346-1350. > > 11. Velayos FS, Terdiman JP, Walsh JM. Effect of 5-aminosalicylate > use on cancer and dysplasia risk: a systematic review and meta- > analysis of observational studies. Am J Gastroenterol. 2005;100:1345- > 1353. > > 12. Lashner BA, Shapiro BD. Husain A, Goldblum JR. Evaluation of the > usefulness of testing for p53 mutations in colorectal cancer for > ulcerative colitis. Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;94:456-462. > > 13. Lashner BA, Heidenreich PA, Su GL, et al. Effect of folate > supplementation on the incidence of dysplasia and cancer in > ulcerative coiltis. Gastroenterology. 1989;97:255-259. > > 14. Lashner BA. Red blood cell folate is associated with the > development of dysplasia and cancer in ulcerative colitis. J Cancer > Res Clin Oncol. 1993;119:549-554. > > 15. Lashner BA, Provencher KS, Seidner DL, et al. The effect of folic > acid on the risk for cancer or dysplasia in ulcerative colitis. > Gastroenterology. 1997;112:29-32. > > 16. Soetikno RM, Lin OS, Heidenreich PA, Young HS, Blackstone MO. > Increased risk of colorectal neoplasia in patients with primary > sclerosing cholangitis and ulcerative colitis: a meta-analysis. > Gastrointest Endosc. 2002;56:48-54. > > 17. Shetty K, Rybicki L, Brzezinski A, Carey WD, Lashner BA. The risk > for cancer or dysplasia in ulcerative colitis patients with primary > sclerosing cholangitis. Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;94:1643-1649. > > 18. Tung BY, Emond MJ, Haggitt RC, et al. Ursodiol use is associated > with lower prevalence of colonic neoplasia in patients with > ulcerative colitis and primary sclerosing cholangitis. Ann Intern > Med. 2001;134:89-95. > > 19. Pardi DS, Loftus EV, Kremers WK, et al. Ursodeoxycholic acid as a > chemopreventive agent in patients with ulcerative colitis and primary > sclerosing cholangitis. Gastroenterology. 2003;124:889-893. > > 20. Wolf JM, Rybicki LA, Lashner BA. The impact of ursodeoxycholic > acid on cancer, dysplasia, and mortality in ulcerative colitis > patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. > 2005;22:783-788. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 I'm very surprised they've found " it wasn't shown to be effective for PSC " . In individual cases it is very effective for bringing down LVT numbers. If that doesn't translate into better prognosis, maybe the LVT numbers are meaningless and we shouldn't bother getting the blood tests. My LVT numbers were climbing rapidly at year ten (in 1999) and I believe starting URSO brought them back down and have kept them down for the last nine years. Averages alk phos (<125) ast (<36) bilirub. (<25) ALT (<50) Gamma GT(<49) target values date 1990-94 208.1 61.1 13.0 299.8 alkphos - obstruction - (<125) 1995-99 291.4 93.0 20.8 260.5 771.6 ast (SGOT) - cell condition - (<36) 2000-04 173.2 38.7 11.1 40.4 132.8 Gamma GT - (<49) 2005-09 169.5 36.8 9.0 36.5 110.0 billirub - (<25) current URSO Dosage 500mg/day (5.3 mg/kg/day) as of June 9, 2008 I'm a Canadian and the number count they use for Bilirubum is different from that they use in the USA (about 17 x higher). My Bilirubim counts are within normal range. Ian (52) PSC 89 -- Ian Cribb P.Eng. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 All, something has got to be missing in the medical world. As I have stated before, my 10 year old Tyler, had a GGT in the 1,000's with all other liver function tests substantially elevated. Intense abdominal right quadrant constant pain. Until we saw the team of Doctors at Children's in Chicago, the pain was dismissed as Colitis which it was not (it was different for him, immensely). Within a week of URso, 1000 mg, daily all normalized. So, if he would not have taken it, what would have happened with the high liver levels? What would have happened with the pain? Where would he be? It makes no sense that doctors say there in not pain with PSC as it was excruciating for him. Very frustrating. I know many of you have shared your thoughts before, but somehow, somewhere, something someone says may make a difference in the medical world. And, I keep looking for that to share with our Liver/GI doctor team... All the best to each of y ou, Stevie Ostos. " Ian Cribb " " Ian Cribb " Sent by: 06/18/2008 12:12 PM Please respond to To cc Subject Re: Re: High Dose Urso Study I'm very surprised they've found " it wasn't shown to be effective for PSC " . In individual cases it is very effective for bringing down LVT numbers. If that doesn't translate into better prognosis, maybe the LVT numbers are meaningless and we shouldn't bother getting the blood tests. My LVT numbers were climbing rapidly at year ten (in 1999) and I believe starting URSO brought them back down and have kept them down for the last nine years. Averagesalk phos (<125)ast (<36)bilirub. (<25)ALT (<50)Gamma GT (<49)target values date 1990-94208.161.113.0 299.8alkphos - obstruction - (<125) 1995-99291..5771.6ast (SGOT) - cell condition - (<36) 2000-04173.238..8Gamma GT - (<49) 2005-09169.536.89.036.5110.0billirub - (<25) current URSO Dosage 500mg/day (5.3 mg/kg/day) as of June 9, 2008 I'm a Canadian and the number count they use for Bilirubum is different from that they use in the USA (about 17 x higher). My Bilirubim counts are within normal range. Ian (52) PSC 89 -- Ian Cribb P.Eng. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 -----Original Message----- If that doesn't translate into better prognosis, maybe the LVT numbers are meaningless and we shouldn't bother getting the blood tests. Study after study has shown URSO does not slow disease progression. It reduces lab values, but that’s it, nothing more. They have been studing URSO, low dose, high dose, early in disease to late disease for years and years. I’m afraid we just have to believe the studies. Dr Lindor does lots of studies with PSC pateints, he knows the disease inside and out, and I’m sure this finding was as big of a let down for him as it was for all of us. But if there was any proof or even a hint of something good to come, he would’nt have shut the study down. LFT’s are a great guideline, their important numbers to watch, they tell doctors a lot about how their patient is doing. Much like line markers used in football. But….the most important lab values (the goal posts) are the ones used for MELD scoring. So URSO can give your team an extra yard or two, you’re (sadly) still moving towards that goal post. Sorry, Barb in Texas - Together in the Fight.... Whatever it Takes! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 Barb, I am trying sooo hard to understand. If Lab values are normal, then the liver is good, right?. On Urso, can the lab values go bad? If the lab values maintain good, then the liver is not sick. If the lab values are good on Urso, you woul dnot qualify for a transplant? What am I missing? Help!! , Stevie Ostos. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 LEt me clarify, how will we know the disease is progressing if the liver lab values are normal? At Your Service, Stevie Lynn Gedgaudas Customer Care Manager Apple Vacations 101 Northwest Point Blvd. Elk Grove Village, IL 60007 sgedgaud@... Stevie Gedgaudas/APPLEVAC/KCDATA Stevie Gedgaudas/APPLEVAC/KCDATA 06/18/2008 01:58 PM To cc Subject RE: Re: High Dose Urso Study Barb, I am trying sooo hard to understand. If Lab values are normal, then the liver is good, right?. On Urso, can the lab values go bad? If the lab values maintain good, then the liver is not sick. If the lab values are good on Urso, you woul dnot qualify for a transplant? What am I missing? Help!! , Stevie Ostos. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 > > LEt me clarify, how will we know the disease is progressing if the liver > lab values are normal? ======================== Stevie -- There are a number of other indications to show that the disease is progressing. My own LFTs have remained well within normal limits for the past 7 years (and No, I'm not on Urso). However, the albumin will slowly but steadily drop to below normal (and your calcium level follows the albumin as it goes down), platelets may drop to indicate splenomegaly, CT scans will show if the spleen and/or liver are changing in size and shape. MRI's will indicate portal vein clots, and ascites, as well as the blockages within the liver itself. You may begin bruising quite easily (goes along with the lowered platelet count and an increased prothrombin time and INR). EGD can show varices in the esophagus and stomach. There are all sorts of things. The LFTs are only a very small part of the picture and can be a bit misleading at times. I took Urso for only a few weeks in 2001 but could not tolerate the side effects. My one and only stent was done in 2001 and my LFTs came down from the 500+ level to perfectly normal and have stayed there ever since. They are presently around 25 and 35. You must keep in mind that LFTs are only a very, very small part of the picture, particularly late in the disease process. At this point, I'm stage 4 PSC, have had cirrhosis for several years now, portal hypertension with multiple extensive blood clots in the portal, splenic, mesenteric & intrahepatic veins, hepatic encephalopathy, and prominent splenomegaly. Regards, Carolyn B. in SC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 I have to admit I'm also confused, because hasn't urso been shown to be beneficial for cencer prevention (if not in slowing down the progression of the disease)? Here's some material from UptoDate, a physician friend of mine gave me a temporary membership: " In vitro and animal data suggest that the synthetic bile acid ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) may be chemoprotective against the development of colon cancer [23,24] . The mechanism is unknown but may be due to reductions in the colonic concentration of toxic secondary bile acids [10,12,15,25] . Furthermore, UDCA inhibited proliferation of colon cancer cell lines and in animal models [11,23,24,26] The possible clinical significance of these observations in humans was supported in a placebo controlled trial that included 52 patients with PSC and ulcerative colitis who had previously participated in a controlled trial of UDCA (13 to 15 mg/kg body weight per day in divided doses) for PSC [27,28] . The average age of participants was 43, the majority had pancolitis, and the median duration of ulcerative colitis was 15 years. During follow-up, colorectal neoplasia developed in three patients who had received UDCA compared with eight initially assigned to placebo (10 versus 35 percent, RR 0.26, 95 percent CI 0.06 to 0.92). A similar magnitude of benefit was also suggested in an earlier retrospective case-control study in which the use of UDCA in UC patients with PSC was associated with a decreased risk of colonic dysplasia (odds ratio of 0.18, 95 percent confidence interval 0.05 to 0.61) [29] . The effect of UDCA was noted after controlling for sex, age at onset of UC, duration of UC, duration of PSC, Child-Pugh class, and use of other medications. The chemoprotective effect of UDCA in colonic carcinogenesis in UC patients must be confirmed in prospective, randomized trials, which are currently underway. A protective effect of UDCA on polyp recurrence has also been suggested in patients with primary biliary cirrhosis [30] . A benefit on prevention of recurrent adenomas that contained high-grade dysplasia was described in a controlled trial of patients with sporadic adenomas, although there was not statistically significant benefit on adenoma recurrence overall [31] . " So this would let me think it still has benefits. BTW, what ARE the terrible side effects of Urso that everyone keeps mentioning? Ruth > > > > LEt me clarify, how will we know the disease is progressing if the liver > > lab values are normal? > ======================== > > Stevie -- There are a number of other indications to show that the disease is progressing. > My own LFTs have remained well within normal limits for the past 7 years (and No, I'm not > on Urso). > > However, the albumin will slowly but steadily drop to below normal (and your calcium level > follows the albumin as it goes down), platelets may drop to indicate splenomegaly, CT > scans will show if the spleen and/or liver are changing in size and shape. MRI's will > indicate portal vein clots, and ascites, as well as the blockages within the liver itself. You > may begin bruising quite easily (goes along with the lowered platelet count and an > increased prothrombin time and INR). EGD can show varices in the esophagus and > stomach. > > There are all sorts of things. The LFTs are only a very small part of the picture and can be > a bit misleading at times. > > I took Urso for only a few weeks in 2001 but could not tolerate the side effects. My one > and only stent was done in 2001 and my LFTs came down from the 500+ level to perfectly > normal and have stayed there ever since. They are presently around 25 and 35. You must > keep in mind that LFTs are only a very, very small part of the picture, particularly late in > the disease process. > > At this point, I'm stage 4 PSC, have had cirrhosis for several years now, portal hypertension > with multiple extensive blood clots in the portal, splenic, mesenteric & intrahepatic veins, > hepatic encephalopathy, and prominent splenomegaly. > > Regards, > Carolyn B. in SC > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.