Abstract
Background Patients with gastrointestinal symptoms of chronic diarrhea, chronic constipation, and abdominal pain might have unspecified signs and symptoms making them hardly characterized. These patients could be labeled as chronic nonspecific colitis patients. In this investigation, we aimed to compare the therapeutic effects of mesalamine in chronic nonspecific colitis patients with by measuring the levels of fecal calprotectin and assessing the reduction of their symptoms during the treatment.
Methods Eighty-four outpatients (42 patients with normal, and 42 having high calprotectin levels) participated in this study. Participants were being treated by 2 grams of mesalamine for one month, and they were evaluated weekly. After one month, the participants’ signs and symptoms were reviewed, and the patients were labeled as treated or untreated.
Results The result of this study demonstrated that there was no significant difference between the level of calprotectin among male or female participants, patients with different ages, or patients with different symptoms. Calprotectin levels were significantly different between patients who positively responded to mesalamine treatment compared to those who did not (p<0.001). On the other hand, patients with high calprotectin levels had a higher response rate to mesalamine (94.5%), compared to those with normal calprotectin levels (36.1%; p<0.001).
Conclusion There was a significant correlation between the level of fecal calprotectin and the response rate of the patients to mesalamine; therefore, this parameter might be a good indicator to be used for treatment plans. Further studies are suggested to affirm this outcome.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
ir.iau.najafabad.rec.1396.79
Funding Statement
The authors received no financial support for the research and authorship.
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:
Medical Ethics Committee of Islamic Azad University of Najafabad, Isfahan, Iran gave ethical approval for this work (Reg. No: ir.iau.najafabad.rec.1396.79).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
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, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Competing Interest The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this paper.
Funding The authors received no financial support for the research and authorship.
Data Availability
The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are publicly available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.