Cited by 285Inflammatory Bowel DiseaseGut microbiota and healthMicroscopic Colitis

Lyophilised oral faecal microbiota transplantation for ulcerative colitis (Lotus): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Haifer, Craig, Paramsothy, Sudarshan, Kaakoush, Nadeem O, Saikal, Aiasha, Ghaly, Simon, Yang, Tao, Luu, Laurence Don Wai, Borody, Thomas J +1 more·2022·The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology

Abstract

Background Faecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) delivered via colonoscopic infusion or enemas have been shown to induce remission in a proportion of patients with active ulcerative colitis. Whether orally administered FMT is effective in ulcerative colitis is unknown. We aimed to assess the efficacy of oral lyophilised FMT for the treatment of active ulcerative colitis. Methods A double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial was conducted at two centres in Australia. Eligible patients were aged 18-75 years with active ulcerative colitis (defined as clinical and endoscopic active ulcerative colitis, with a total Mayo score of 4-10, and a Mayo endoscopic subscore ≥1). After 2 weeks of amoxicillin, metronidazole, and doxycycline, patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either oral lyophilised FMT or placebo capsules for 8 weeks, using a prespecified computer-generated randomisation list with a permuted block size of 8. The primary outcome was corticosteroid-free clinical remission with endoscopic remission or response (total Mayo score ≤2, all subscores ≤1, and ≥1 point reduction in endoscopic subscore) at week 8. At week 8, FMT responders were randomly assigned (in a 1:1 ratio, permuted block size of 8) to either continue or withdraw FMT for a further 48 weeks. Analyses were done by modified intention-to-treat, including all patients who received at least one study dose. This trial is registered with Australian New Zealand Trial Registry, number ACTRN…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s2468-1253(21)00400-3

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Haifer, C., Paramsothy, S., Kaakoush, N. O., Saikal, A., Ghaly, S., Yang, T., Luu, L. D. W., Borody, T. J., & Leong, R. W.
Affiliations
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
  • Centre For Digestive Diseases (AU)
Corresponding author
Leong, Rupert W
Venue
The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-02
Volume
7
Issue
2
Pages
141-151
ISSN
  • 2468-1156 (ISSN-L)
  • 2468-1253
OpenAlex
W3215433280
Cited by
285
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 45 · 2025: 79 · 2024: 60 · 2023: 68 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 1
FWCI
22.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Lancet. Gastroenterology & hepatology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Gastroenterological Society of Australia
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Inflammatory Bowel Disease
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Microscopic Colitis
Keywords
fecal microbiota transplantation, ulcerative colitis, corticosteroid-free remission, endoscopic remission, treatment withdrawal, COVID-19 pandemic, inflammatory bowel disease, antibiotic pretreatment, clinical remission, endoscopic response, safety and tolerability
MeSH terms
Fecal Microbiota Transplantation, Administration, Oral, Adult, Anti-Bacterial Agents, Colitis, Ulcerative, Double-Blind Method, Female, Freeze Drying, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Remission Induction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review