Effects of intervention with sulindac and inulin/VSL#3 on mucosal and luminal factors in the pouch of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis

Background/aim In order to define future chemoprevention strategies for adenomas or carcinomas in the pouch of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), a 4-weeks intervention with (1) sulindac, (2) inulin/VSL#3, and (3) sulindac/inulin/VSL#3 was performed on 17 patients with FAP in a sing...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International journal of colorectal disease 2011-05, Vol.26 (5), p.575-582
Hauptverfasser: Friederich, Pieter, Verschuur, Jelle, van Heumen, Bjorn W. H., Roelofs, Hennie M. J., Berkhout, Marloes, Nagtegaal, Iris D., van Oijen, Martijn G. H., van Krieken, Johannes H. J. M., Peters, Wilbert H. M., Nagengast, Fokko M.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background/aim In order to define future chemoprevention strategies for adenomas or carcinomas in the pouch of patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), a 4-weeks intervention with (1) sulindac, (2) inulin/VSL#3, and (3) sulindac/inulin/VSL#3 was performed on 17 patients with FAP in a single center intervention study. Primary endpoints were the risk parameters cell proliferation and glutathione S-transferase (GST) detoxification capacity in the pouch mucosa; secondary endpoints were the short chain fatty acid (SCFA) contents, pH, and cytotoxicity of fecal water. Methods Before the start and at the end of each 4-week intervention period, six biopsies of the pouch were taken and feces was collected during 24 h. Cell proliferation and GST enzyme activity was assessed in the biopsies and pH, SCFA contents, and cytotoxicity were assessed in the fecal water fraction. The three interventions (sulindac, inulin/VSL#3, sulindac/inulin/VSL#3) were compared with the Mann–Whitney U test. Results Cell proliferation was lower after sulindac or VSL#3/inulin, the combination treatment with sulindac/inulin/VSL#3 showed the opposite. GST enzyme activity was increased after sulindac or VSL#3/inulin, the combination treatment showed the opposite effect. However, no significance was reached in all these measures. Cytotoxicity, pH, and SCFA content of fecal water showed no differences at all among the three treatment groups. Conclusion Our study revealed non-significant decreased cell proliferation and increased detoxification capacity after treatment with sulindac or VSL#3/inulin; however, combining both regimens did not show an additional effect.
ISSN:0179-1958
1432-1262
DOI:10.1007/s00384-010-1127-y