Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,039

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Coated mesalazine (5-aminosalicylic acid) versus sulphasalazine in the treatment of active ulcerative colitis: a randomised trial.

Open access
Rachmilewitz, D.·1989·BMJ

Abstract

OBJECTIVE--To assess the safety and efficacy of a preparation of mesalazine (5-aminosalicylic acid) coated with a pH dependent resin (Eudragit L) as compared with sulphasalazine in patients with active mild to moderate ulcerative colitis. DESIGN--Eight week randomised double blind parallel group study. SETTING--Forty six gastroenterology outpatient clinics in seven countries. PATIENTS--Two hundred and twenty patients aged 18-70 who met the following criteria: clinical activity index greater than or equal to 6 and endoscopic index greater than or equal to 4; no concomitant treatment for ulcerative colitis; no hypersensitivity to salicylates or sulphonamides. Of the 164 patients eligible for efficacy analysis, 87 received the coated preparation of mesalazine and 77 sulphasalazine. Most of the remaining patients (28 in each group) were ineligible for the efficacy analysis because of treatment with steroid enemas. All pretrial characteristics were comparable in the two treatment groups. INTERVENTIONS--Coated mesalazine (Mesasal) 1.5 g daily or sulphasalazine 3.0 g daily for eight weeks. Compliance monitored by pill counts. END POINT--Clinical and endoscopic remission. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS--Clinical activity measured by daily diary cards, assessment by investigators, and laboratory findings. Endoscopic evaluation at week 8. After four weeks 50 of 70 patients (71%) taking coated mesalazine and 38 of 58 (66%) taking sulphasalazine had achieved remission of their disease by eight weeks remission rates were 74% (37/50 patients) and 81% (35/43) in the two treatment groups respectively. Endoscopic remission at eight weeks was recorded in 20 of 41 patients (49%) taking coated mesalazine and 18 of 38 (47%) taking sulphasalazine. There was a higher incidence of adverse events among patients taking sulphasalazine (25/105; 24%) than among those taking coated mesalazine (16/115; 14%). CONCLUSION--Mesalazine coated with Eudragit L is a safe, logical alternative to sulphasalazine.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmj.298.6666.82

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Rachmilewitz, D.
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
1989-01-14
Volume
298
Issue
6666
Pages
82-86
ISSN
  • 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
  • 1468-5833
OpenAlex
W2166930089
Cited by
1,039
References
2
FWCI
6.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.