BackgroundAbdominal bloating is a common symptom in patients with irritable bowel syndrome with constipation (IBS-C). However, it is not included among the required items in the Rome III diagnostic criteria for IBS. Little is known about an impact of abdominal bloating seen in patients with IBS-C. Using a large population-based sample, the aim of the present study was to investigate what is the most bothersome symptom in subjects with IBS-C.MethodsAn Internet survey of 30,000 adults drawn from the general public throughout Japan was conducted to identify subtypes of IBS using the Rome III diagnostic questionnaire. Consecutively, the screened subjects with IBS-C and the same number of age- and sex-matched non-IBS subjects who were randomly selected as controls were asked to answer a questionnaire on the degree of anxiety they experienced in their daily lives, thoughts about bowel habit, and their dominant gastrointestinal symptoms together with exacerbation factors (for IBS-C only).ResultsThe screening survey showed that the prevalence of overall IBS was 16.5 % (female 17.4 %, male 15.5 %) and that 2.8 % met the criteria for IBS-C, 4.5 % for IBS with diarrhea (IBS-D) and 8.2 % for mixed IBS (IBS-M). Seven hundred and fifty-nine of 835 (90.9 %) subjects with IBS-C and 746 of 830 (89.9 %) control subjects completed the consecutive questionnaire. IBS-C subjects felt a higher degree of anxiety in their daily lives (p < 0.01) and considered bowel habit to be an indicator of health (p < 0.01) to a greater extent than control subjects. In IBS-C, the degree of anxiety was significantly associated with abdominal discomfort (p < 0.01), pain (p < 0.01) and bloating (p = 0.02), but not with the frequency of bowel habit (p > 0.1). Abdominal bloating was the most bothersome symptom (27.5 %), which was more likely to occur after a meal (52.2 %), at work/school (29.2 %) and during times of stress (26.8 %). Only 4.5 % of IBS-C subjects reported abdominal pain as the ‘most bothersome’ symptom.ConclusionsA large population-based Internet survey suggests that abdominal bloating has a great impact on the daily lives of subjects diagnosed with IBS-C. Not only bowel movement/abdominal pain but also abdominal bloating should be evaluated in patients with IBS-C.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13030-016-0070-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Background
Clinical testing was required to verify the effect of linaclotide 0.5 mg/d in patients with irritable bowel syndrome with constipation (IBS‐C) in Japan.
Methods
This was a randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled (Part 1) and long‐term, open‐label extension (Part 2) study of linaclotide at 60 hospitals and clinics in Japan. Patients with IBS‐C diagnosed using Rome III criteria (n = 500) were randomly assigned to linaclotide 0.5 mg (n = 249) or placebo (n = 251) for a 12‐week treatment period followed by open‐label treatment with linaclotide (n = 324) for an additional 40 weeks. The primary endpoints were the responder rate of global improvement of IBS symptoms and complete spontaneous bowel movement (CSBM) during 12 weeks. The secondary endpoints included responder rates of SBM and abdominal pain/discomfort relief.
Key Results
Part 1: The responder rates for global improvement and for CSBM frequency were significantly higher for linaclotide compared to placebo (P < 0.001). Secondary endpoints including responder rates for SBM and abdominal pain/discomfort relief in the linaclotide group were also significantly greater than those in the placebo group. Part 2: Patients switched from placebo to linaclotide showed similar responder rates for global improvement and CSBM frequency to those in patients who continued to receive linaclotide, supporting sustained efficacy. Diarrhea was seen in 14.5% of patients; all cases were mild or moderate.
Conclusions and Inferences
This study suggests that a linaclotide dose of 0.5 mg is effective and safe for IBS‐C patients in Japan.
Background
A previous phase II dose‐ranging study of linaclotide in a Japanese chronic constipation (CC) population showed that 0.5 mg was the most effective dose. This study aimed to verify the hypothesis that 0.5 mg of linaclotide is effective and safe in Japanese CC patients.
Methods
This was a Japanese phase III randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled (part 1), and long‐term, open‐label extension (part 2) study of linaclotide. CC patients (n = 186) diagnosed using the Rome III criteria were randomly assigned to linaclotide 0.5 mg (n = 95) or placebo (n = 91) for a 4‐week double‐blind treatment period in part 1, followed by an additional 52 weeks of open‐label treatment with linaclotide in part 2. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change from baseline in weekly spontaneous bowel movement (SBM) frequency at the first week. Secondary endpoints included responder rate for complete SBM (CSBM), changes in stool consistency, and severity of straining.
Key Results
Part 1: Change in weekly mean SBM frequency in the first week of treatment with linaclotide (4.02) was significantly greater than that with placebo (1.48, P < 0.001). Linaclotide produced a higher CSBM responder rate (52.7%) compared to placebo (26.1%, P < 0.001). Part 2: Patients continued to show improved SBM frequency with linaclotide. Through parts 1 and 2, the most common drug‐related adverse event was mild and occasionally moderate diarrhea.
Conclusions and Inferences
The results of this study indicate that a linaclotide dose of 0.5 mg/day is effective and safe in Japanese CC patients.
Our results suggest that 0.0625, 0.125, 0.25, and 0.5 mg/d are effective doses of linaclotide for treating CC in Japanese patients. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02425722, supported by Astellas Pharma, Inc.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.