ABSTRACT
Purpose The standard of care for treatment of celiac disease (CD) is a stringent lifetime glutenfree diet (GFD), which is very challenging. Larazotide acetate (AT-1001) is an anti-zonulin which functions as a gut permeability regulator for treatment of CD. We endeavored to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which studied the efficacy and safety of larazotide acetate in patients with CD.
Methods We examined four databases from inception to 20-August-2020 using related keywords. We identified all relevant RCTs and judged their risk of bias. We pooled continuous outcomes as mean difference and dichotomous outcomes as risk ratio with 95% confidence interval under fixed-effects meta-analysis model.
Results Four RCTs met our eligibility criteria, comprising 626 patients (larazotide acetate, n = 465, placebo, n = 161). Three and two studies reported outcomes of patients undergoing gluten challenge and GFD, respectively. For change in lactulose-to-mannitol ratio, the overall effect estimate did not reveal a significant difference between larazotide acetate and placebo groups. For change in total gastrointestinal symptom rating scale (GSRS), subgroup analysis showed that larazotide acetate significantly yielded better symptomatic improvement in the gluten challenge but not gluten free subgroup. Similar finding was found for change in celiac-disease GSRS (CD-GSRS) favoring the gluten challenge over gluten free subgroup. When compared to placebo, larazotide acetate favorably reduced the adverse event (AE) of gluten-related diarrhea in patients who underwent gluten challenge. Other AEs were comparable between both treatment groups.
Conclusions Larazotide acetate is well-endured and superior to placebo in alleviating gastrointestinal symptoms.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
None
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Not applicable or required.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The data used to support the findings of this study are included within the article.
