4.7 Article

Randomised clinical trial: effects of MD-7246 on irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhoea

Journal

ALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS
Volume 57, Issue 2, Pages 192-204

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/apt.17274

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study found that MD-7246 did not relieve abdominal pain in patients with IBS-D, and most other efficacy measures did not show improvement compared to placebo.
Background MD-7246, a delayed-release formulation of linaclotide, is designed to target the ileocaecal junction and caecum with the aim of relieving abdominal pain independently of bowel function. Aims To evaluate the efficacy, safety and dose-response of MD-7246 in patients with irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhoea (IBS-D). Methods A randomised, double-blind, phase 2 clinical trial enrolled adult patients with IBS-D (Rome IV criteria). Patients were randomised to placebo or once-daily oral MD-7246 300, 600 or 1200 mu g for 12 weeks. Abdominal and bowel symptoms were assessed daily. Key efficacy endpoints were change from baseline in abdominal pain and responder rates for a 30% reduction in abdominal pain in 6/12 weeks. Additional abdominal pain responder and exploratory bowel function endpoints were also assessed. Results Among the 388 randomised patients, there was no significant difference in mean change from baseline in abdominal pain between the MD-7246 300 mu g, 600 mu g and 1200 mu g groups and placebo (-1.93, -1.58, -1.95 and - 2.01, respectively; p > 0.05 for each group vs placebo). The abdominal pain responder rates in the MD-7246 groups were similar to or lower than those in the placebo group. All doses of MD-7246 had a minimal effect on bowel function and were generally well tolerated. Conclusions MD-7246 at the doses studied did not improve abdominal pain relative to placebo in an IBS-D patient population. Similarly, most additional efficacy endpoints showed no improvement with MD-7246 relative to placebo.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available