An Open-Label, Noncomparative, Multicenter Study to Evaluate Efficacy and Safety of NASHA/Dx Gel as a Bulking Agent for the Treatment of Fecal Incontinence

Fecal incontinence (FI) is the involuntary loss of rectal contents through the anal canal. Reports of its prevalence vary from 1-21%. Studies, have demonstrated a positive effect on FI symptoms with injectable bulking agents. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of NASHA/Dx gel in the treatment of FI. One hundred fifteen eligible patients suffering from FI received 4 injections of 1 mL NASHA/Dx gel. Primary efficacy was based on data from 86 patients that completed the study. This study demonstrated a ≥50% reduction from baseline in the number of FI episodes in 57.1% of patients at 6 months, and 64.0% at 12 months. Significant improvements (P < .001) were also noted in total number of both solid and loose FI episodes, FI free days, CCFIS, and FIQL scores in all 4 domains. The majority of the treatment related AEs (94.9%) were mild or moderate intensity, and (98.7%) of AEs resolved spontaneously, or following treatment, without sequelae. Results of this study indicate NASHA/Dx gel was efficacious in the treatment of FI. Treatment effect was significant both in reduction of number of FI episodes and disease specific quality of life at 6 months and lasted up to 12 months after treatment.

Efficacy of prescribed injectable diacetylmorphine in the Andalusian trial: Bayesian analysis of responders and non-responders according to a multi domain outcome index.

BACKGROUND The objective of this research was to evaluate data from a randomized clinical trial that tested injectable diacetylmorphine (DAM) and oral methadone (MMT) for substitution treatment, using a multi-domain dichotomous index, with a Bayesian approach. METHODS Sixty two long-term, socially-excluded heroin injectors, not benefiting from available treatments were randomized to receive either DAM or MMT for 9 months in Granada, Spain. Completers were 44 and data at the end of the study period was obtained for 50. Participants were determined to be responders or non responders using a multi-domain outcome index accounting for their physical and mental health and psychosocial integration, used in a previous trial. Data was analyzed with Bayesian methods, using information from a similar study conducted in The Netherlands to select a priori distributions. On adding the data from the present study to update the a priori information, the distribution of the difference in response rates were obtained and used to build credibility intervals and relevant probability computations. RESULTS In the experimental group (n = 27), the rate of responders to treatment was 70.4% (95% CI 53.287.6), and in the control group (n = 23), it was 34.8% (95% CI 15.354.3). The probability of success in the experimental group using the a posteriori distributions was higher after a proper sensitivity analysis. Almost the whole distribution of the rates difference (the one for diacetylmorphine minus methadone) was located to the right of the zero, indicating the superiority of the experimental treatment. CONCLUSION The present analysis suggests a clinical superiority of injectable diacetylmorphine compared to oral methadone in the treatment of severely affected heroin injectors not benefiting sufficiently from the available treatments. TRIAL REGISTRATION Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN52023186.