Ralf Mohrbacher

Transglutaminase 2 (TG2) plays a pivotal role in the pathogenesis of celiac disease (CeD) by deamidating dietary gluten peptides, which facilitates antigenic presentation and a strong anti-gluten T cell response. Here, we elucidate the molecular mechanisms underlying the efficacy of the TG2 inhibitor ZED1227 by performing transcriptional analysis of duodenal biopsies from individuals with CeD on a long-term gluten-free diet before and after a 6-week gluten challenge combined with 100 mg per day ZED1227 or placebo. At the transcriptome level, orally administered ZED1227 effectively prevented gluten-induced intestinal damage and inflammation, providing molecular-level evidence that TG2 inhibition is an effective strategy for treating CeD. ZED1227 treatment preserved transcriptome signatures associated with mucosal morphology, inflammation, cell differentiation and nutrient absorption to the level of the gluten-free diet group. Nearly half of the gluten-induced gene expression changes in CeD were associated with the epithelial interferon-γ response. Moreover, data suggest that deamidated gluten-induced adaptive immunity is a sufficient step to set the stage for CeD pathogenesis. Our results, with the limited sample size, also suggest that individuals with CeD might benefit from an HLA-DQ2/HLA-DQ8 stratification based on gene doses to maximally eliminate the interferon-γ-induced mucosal damage triggered by gluten.

Background and Aims: Proctitis is the least extensive type of ulcerative colitis, for which rectal therapy is rarely studied and is underused. This study evaluated the efficacy, safety, and patient’s preference of a novel formulation of budesonide suppository 4 mg, compared with a commercially available budesonide rectal foam 2 mg, for the treatment of mild to moderate ulcerative proctitis. Methods: This was a randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled trial. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either budesonide 4 mg suppository or budesonide 2 mg foam once daily for 8 weeks. The co-primary endpoints were changes from baseline to Week 8 in clinical symptoms, for which clinical remission was defined as having a modified Ulcerative Colitis-Disease Activity Index [UC-DAI] subscore for stool frequency of 0 or 1 and a subscore for rectal bleeding of 0, and mucosal healing, defined as having a modified UC-DAI subscore for mucosal appearance of 0 or 1. Using a more stringent criterion, we additionally analysed deepened mucosal healing, which was defined as a mucosal appearance subscore of 0. Patient’s preference, physician’s global assessment, and quality of life were also assessed and analysed. Results: Overall, 286 and 291 patients were included in the 4 mg suppository and 2 mg foam groups, respectively. Budesonide 4 mg suppository met the prespecified criterion for non-inferiority to the 2 mg foam in both co-primary endpoints of clinical remission and mucosal healing. Secondary endpoints consistently supported the non-inferiority of the suppository. Trends in favour of the suppository were observed in the subgroup of mesalazine non-responders. More patients reported a preference for the suppository over rectal foam. Conclusions: In patients with ulcerative proctitis, budesonide 4 mg suppository was non-inferior to budesonide 2 mg foam in efficacy, and both were safe and well tolerated.

Background and aims Incomplete microscopic colitis (MCi) is a subtype of microscopic colitis (MC). Budesonide is recommended as a first-line treatment for MC. However, randomised trials on efficacy of treatment in MCi are missing. We therefore performed a randomised, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate budesonide as induction therapy for MCi. Methods Patients with active MCi were randomly assigned to either budesonide 9 mg once daily or placebo for 8 weeks in a double-blind, double-dummy design. The primary endpoint was clinical remission, defined as a mean of p = 0.0582). All clinical secondary endpoints were in favour of budesonide. Budesonide decreased the number of soft or watery stools (16.3 vs. 7.7, p = 0.0186) and improved health-related quality of life for all four dimensions of the short health scale. Adverse events with a suspected relation to study drug were reported in one patient in the budesonide group and two patients in the placebo group. Neither serious nor severe adverse events occurred during the double-blind phase. Conclusions Budesonide decreased the frequency of soft or watery stools and improved the patients' quality of life significantly in MCi, but the primary endpoint was not met due to the low sample size (type 2 error). Budesonide was safe and well tolerated during the 8-weeks treatment course.

Summary: Background: Previous studies have reached conflicting conclusions regarding the efficacy of mesalazine in the prevention of recurrent diverticulitis.Aim: To investigate the efficacy and safety of mesalazine granules in the prevention of recurrence of diverticulitis after acute uncomplicated diverticulitis.Methods: Two phase 3, randomised, placebo‐controlled, double‐blind multicentre trials (SAG‐37 and SAG‐51) investigated mesalazine granules in patients with prior episodes (P=.226). In SAG‐51, the proportion of recurrence‐free patients over 48 weeks was 46.0% with 1.5 g mesalazine, 52.0% with 3 g mesalazine and 58.0% with placebo (P=.860 for 3 g mesalazine vs placebo) and over 96 weeks 6.9%, 9.8% and 23.1% respectively (P=.980 for 3 g mesalazine vs placebo). Patients with only one diverticulitis episode in the year prior to study entry had a lower recurrence risk compared to >1 episode. Safety data revealed no new adverse events.Conclusion: Mesalazine was not superior to placebo in preventing recurrence of diverticulitis.