P735 Comparative assessment of probiotics and standard therapies for mild to moderate ulcerative colitis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis
P. Paschos1, A. Katsoula2, K. Malandris2, M. Sarigianni2, E. Athanasiadou2, A. Koukoufiki2, O. Giouleme3, A. Tsapas2
1Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece, Clinical Research and Evidence-Based Medicine Unit, Thessaloniki, Greece, 2Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Clinical research and Evidence-Based Medicine Unit, Thessaloniki, Greece, 3Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Second Propaideutic Department of Internal Medicine, Thessaloniki, Greece
Background
We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis to compare probiotics to current therapies in the induction and maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis (UC).
Methods
We systematically searched Medline, Embase, CENTRAL up to November 2018. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in patients with mild to moderate UC that compared probiotics, sulfasalazine, mesalamine (low dose <2 g/day, standard dose ≥ 2 g/day), olsalazine, balsalazide, budesonide, budesonide MMX and beclomethasone either alone or in combination with topical therapy, to each other or placebo. We excluded trials where <50% of the population had extensive or left-sided colitis. Outcomes were remission (induction studies), relapse (maintenance studies) and discontinuation due to adverse events (tolerability). We conducted random-effects network meta-analysis and ranked treatments based on the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities.
Results
Forty-eight trials (probiotics 6 trials) of induction therapy and 30 trials (probiotics 6 trials) of maintenance therapy were included in the analysis. In studies with probiotics concomitant treatment, mainly mesalamine, were allowed. At induction, probiotics were not superior to placebo (OR 1.43; 95%CI 0.84–2.42) and they were inferior to combined oral and topical mesalamine therapy (OR 0.28; 95%CI 0.12–0.66) and combined mesalamine and beclomethasone therapy (OR 0.27; 95%CI 0.09–0.83). On SUCRA analysis, combination therapies (SUCRA 0.92 and 0.93) were ranked the highest followed by balsalazide (SUCRA 0.71), budesonide ΜΜΧ (SUCRA 0.68), standard dose mesalamine (SUCRA 0.52), beclomethasone (SUCRA 0.50), olsalazine (SUCRA 0.41), probiotics (SUCRA 0.29), low dose mesalamine (SUCRA 0.26) and sulfasalazine (SUCRA 0.23) in terms of inducing remission. Probiotics were well tolerated. At maintenance, probiotics (OR 0.35; 95%CI 0.19–0.62) and their combination with mesalamine (OR 0.38; 95%CI 0.15–0.99) had lower rate of relapse compared with placebo, but there were no differences when compared with other treatments. On SUCRA analysis, probiotics either alone or combined with mesalamine had comparable SUCRA values to standard dose mesalamine (SUCRA 0.59) and sulfasalazine (SUCRA 0.68). The combination of oral and rectal mesalamine was superior to placebo (OR 0.10; 95%CI 0.04–0.26) and all other treatments and it was ranked highest (SUCRA 0.99). Probiotics were ranked the best tolerated option in terms of discontinuation due to adverse events (SUCRA 0.80).
Conclusion
Probiotics are well tolerated but they are not effective in inducing remission in active UC. They may be effective when added to mesalamine therapy in preventing relapse of quiescent UC, but large, well-designed RCTs are needed.