Baruch Ovadia, Eva Niv, Sara Stern Katie, Elisabeth Mahajna, Oren Gal, Yael Kopelman
{"title":"模连与布地奈德对克罗恩病患者临床反应及粘膜愈合的影响。","authors":"Baruch Ovadia, Eva Niv, Sara Stern Katie, Elisabeth Mahajna, Oren Gal, Yael Kopelman","doi":"10.3748/wjg.v31.i5.100238","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mucosal healing has become an important goal of Crohn's disease (CD) treatments. Modulen, enriched with transforming growth factor-beta 2, and budesonide are commonly accepted treatments for mild-moderate CD. However, their effects on the small bowel (SB) mucosa remain underexplored.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To prospectively assess clinical and mucosal responses to Modulen <i>vs</i> budesonide in adults with CD, using SB capsule endoscopy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Thirty patients were divided into two groups: Modulen + home-based diet (21 patients) and budesonide (9 patients) for an eight-week intervention followed by four weeks of follow-up. Clinical, laboratory, and endoscopic responses were evaluated. The mucosal changes were assessed through SB capsule endoscopy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Results indicated significant clinical improvement in the Modulen group with reduced CD activity index (<i>P</i> = 0.041) and improved inflammatory bowel disease questionnaire score (<i>P</i> = 0.016). Moreover, Modulen was associated with a significant SB mucosal improvement, evidenced by a decrease in Lewis score (<i>P</i> = 0.027). No significant changes were observed in calprotectin or other laboratory parameters. Conversely, budesonide exhibited more modest clinical effects, but it improved calprotectin, hemoglobin, and C-reactive protein levels (<i>P</i> = 0.051, <i>P</i> = 0.014, and <i>P</i> = 0.038, respectively). The capsule endoscopy did not reveal a significant mucosal response in the budesonide group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both interventions have a role in CD treatment. Yet, their effects differ and may complement each other: Modulen yields clinical and mucosal improvements, while budesonide primarily leads mainly to laboratory improvements.</p>","PeriodicalId":23778,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Gastroenterology","volume":"31 5","pages":"100238"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11718614/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of Modulen <i>vs</i> budesonide on clinical response and mucosal healing in Crohn's patients.\",\"authors\":\"Baruch Ovadia, Eva Niv, Sara Stern Katie, Elisabeth Mahajna, Oren Gal, Yael Kopelman\",\"doi\":\"10.3748/wjg.v31.i5.100238\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mucosal healing has become an important goal of Crohn's disease (CD) treatments. Modulen, enriched with transforming growth factor-beta 2, and budesonide are commonly accepted treatments for mild-moderate CD. However, their effects on the small bowel (SB) mucosa remain underexplored.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To prospectively assess clinical and mucosal responses to Modulen <i>vs</i> budesonide in adults with CD, using SB capsule endoscopy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Thirty patients were divided into two groups: Modulen + home-based diet (21 patients) and budesonide (9 patients) for an eight-week intervention followed by four weeks of follow-up. Clinical, laboratory, and endoscopic responses were evaluated. The mucosal changes were assessed through SB capsule endoscopy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Results indicated significant clinical improvement in the Modulen group with reduced CD activity index (<i>P</i> = 0.041) and improved inflammatory bowel disease questionnaire score (<i>P</i> = 0.016). Moreover, Modulen was associated with a significant SB mucosal improvement, evidenced by a decrease in Lewis score (<i>P</i> = 0.027). No significant changes were observed in calprotectin or other laboratory parameters. Conversely, budesonide exhibited more modest clinical effects, but it improved calprotectin, hemoglobin, and C-reactive protein levels (<i>P</i> = 0.051, <i>P</i> = 0.014, and <i>P</i> = 0.038, respectively). The capsule endoscopy did not reveal a significant mucosal response in the budesonide group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both interventions have a role in CD treatment. Yet, their effects differ and may complement each other: Modulen yields clinical and mucosal improvements, while budesonide primarily leads mainly to laboratory improvements.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23778,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"World Journal of Gastroenterology\",\"volume\":\"31 5\",\"pages\":\"100238\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11718614/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"World Journal of Gastroenterology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v31.i5.100238\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v31.i5.100238","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Effect of Modulen vs budesonide on clinical response and mucosal healing in Crohn's patients.
Background: Mucosal healing has become an important goal of Crohn's disease (CD) treatments. Modulen, enriched with transforming growth factor-beta 2, and budesonide are commonly accepted treatments for mild-moderate CD. However, their effects on the small bowel (SB) mucosa remain underexplored.
Aim: To prospectively assess clinical and mucosal responses to Modulen vs budesonide in adults with CD, using SB capsule endoscopy.
Methods: Thirty patients were divided into two groups: Modulen + home-based diet (21 patients) and budesonide (9 patients) for an eight-week intervention followed by four weeks of follow-up. Clinical, laboratory, and endoscopic responses were evaluated. The mucosal changes were assessed through SB capsule endoscopy.
Results: Results indicated significant clinical improvement in the Modulen group with reduced CD activity index (P = 0.041) and improved inflammatory bowel disease questionnaire score (P = 0.016). Moreover, Modulen was associated with a significant SB mucosal improvement, evidenced by a decrease in Lewis score (P = 0.027). No significant changes were observed in calprotectin or other laboratory parameters. Conversely, budesonide exhibited more modest clinical effects, but it improved calprotectin, hemoglobin, and C-reactive protein levels (P = 0.051, P = 0.014, and P = 0.038, respectively). The capsule endoscopy did not reveal a significant mucosal response in the budesonide group.
Conclusion: Both interventions have a role in CD treatment. Yet, their effects differ and may complement each other: Modulen yields clinical and mucosal improvements, while budesonide primarily leads mainly to laboratory improvements.
期刊介绍:
The primary aims of the WJG are to improve diagnostic, therapeutic and preventive modalities and the skills of clinicians and to guide clinical practice in gastroenterology and hepatology.