Original Article
Rifaximin Therapy for Patients with Irritable Bowel Syndrome without Constipation
N Engl J Med 2011; 364:22-32January 6, 2011
Comments
open through January 11, 2011
- Abstract
Background
Evidence suggests that gut flora may play an important role in the pathophysiology of the irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). We evaluated rifaximin, a minimally absorbed antibiotic, as treatment for IBS.
Methods
In two identically designed, phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (TARGET 1 and TARGET 2), patients who had IBS without constipation were randomly assigned to either rifaximin at a dose of 550 mg or placebo, three times daily for 2 weeks, and were followed for an additional 10 weeks. The primary end point, the proportion of patients who had adequate relief of global IBS symptoms, and the key secondary end point, the proportion of patients who had adequate relief of IBS-related bloating, were assessed weekly. Adequate relief was defined as self-reported relief of symptoms for at least 2 of the first 4 weeks after treatment. Other secondary end points included the percentage of patients who had a response to treatment as assessed by daily self-ratings of global IBS symptoms and individual symptoms of bloating, abdominal pain, and stool consistency during the 4 weeks after treatment and during the entire 3 months of the study.
Results
Significantly more patients in the rifaximin group than in the placebo group had adequate relief of global IBS symptoms during the first 4 weeks after treatment (40.8% vs. 31.2%, P=0.01, in TARGET 1; 40.6% vs. 32.2%, P=0.03, in TARGET 2; 40.7% vs. 31.7%, P<0.001, in the two studies combined). Similarly, more patients in the rifaximin group than in the placebo group had adequate relief of bloating (39.5% vs. 28.7%, P=0.005, in TARGET 1; 41.0% vs. 31.9%, P=0.02, in TARGET 2; 40.2% vs. 30.3%, P<0.001, in the two studies combined). In addition, significantly more patients in the rifaximin group had a response to treatment as assessed by daily ratings of IBS symptoms, bloating, abdominal pain, and stool consistency. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups.
Conclusions
Among patients who had IBS without constipation, treatment with rifaximin for 2 weeks provided significant relief of IBS symptoms, bloating, abdominal pain, and loose or watery stools. (Funded by Salix Pharmaceuticals; ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00731679 and NCT00724126.)
Media in This Article
Figure 1
Study Design.Figure 2
Enrollment, Randomization, and Follow-up in the TARGET 1 and TARGET 2 Studies.Article Activity
- Article
The irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a functional gastrointestinal disorder characterized by recurring symptoms of abdominal pain, bloating, and altered bowel function in the absence of structural, inflammatory, or biochemical abnormalities.1 IBS often does not respond to current treatment options, including dietary and lifestyle modifications, fiber supplementation, psychological therapy, and pharmacotherapy.2,3 Because no reliable biologic or structural markers have been identified, the effects of pharmacotherapy are typically assessed by asking patients to report whether they had adequate relief of IBS symptoms (with a binary response of yes or no).4 Given the limitations of available therapies, there is an unmet medical need for novel therapeutic approaches.
Patients with IBS may have alterations in the intestinal microbiota,5-7 thus leading investigators to consider targeting the intestinal microbiota for the treatment of this condition. Although some patients have had improvement with neomycin therapy, clinical trials have shown that it has marginal efficacy, and side effects limit the use of the drug.8 The use of systemic antibiotics has been reported with mixed results.9
Rifaximin (Xifaxan, Salix Pharmaceuticals) is an oral, nonsystemic, broad-spectrum antibiotic that targets the gut and is associated with a low risk of bacterial resistance.10-12– It has shown efficacy in small-scale studies of IBS. 13,14 We present the results of two large-scale, identically designed, multicenter trials — TARGET 1 and TARGET 2 — of 3 months' duration that examined the relief of IBS symptoms after a 2-week course of rifaximin.
Methods
Study Patients
Eligible patients were at least 18 years of age; had undergone a colonoscopic examination within the previous 2 years; had received a diagnosis of and had current symptoms of IBS (as assessed according to the Rome II diagnostic criteria for IBS15), in particular, symptoms of abdominal pain and discomfort; and did not have adequate relief of global IBS symptoms and of IBS-related bloating at both the time of screening and the time of randomization. Eligible patients rated the average daily amount of abdominal pain and of bloating as a score of 2 to 4.5 on a 7-point Likert scoring system (with 0 indicating not at all; 1, hardly; 2, somewhat; 3, moderately; 4, a good deal; 5, a great deal; and 6, a very great deal) and rated the average daily consistency of their stools as 3.5 or more on a 5-point scale for stool consistency (with 1 indicating very hard; 2, hard; 3, formed; 4, loose; and 5, watery) over the course of at least 7 days.
Exclusion criteria were constipation-predominant IBS (according to the definition in the Rome II criteria15), a history of inflammatory bowel disease, diabetes, unstable thyroid disease, previous abdominal surgery (other than cholecystectomy or appendectomy), human immunodeficiency virus infection, and renal or hepatic disease. Patients were excluded if they were currently taking alosetron, tegaserod, lubiprostone, warfarin, or antipsychotic, antispasmodic, antidiarrheal, probiotic, or narcotic drugs or if they had taken antibiotics within the previous 14 days or rifaximin within 60 days before signing the informed-consent form for the study. Patients were allowed to take antidepressant agents of the selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitor and tricyclic antidepressant classes, provided that they had been taking a stable dose for at least 6 weeks. All patients provided written informed consent before study-related procedures were initiated.
Study Design and Procedures
The protocols were approved by the institutional review board or independent ethics committee at each center, and the studies were conducted in accordance with applicable laws and regulations (see the Supplementary Appendix, available with the full text of this article at NEJM.org). After a screening phase of 7 to 13 days, eligible patients were randomly assigned with the use of an interactive voice-response system to either rifaximin or placebo, in a 1:1 ratio. The randomization code was computer-generated, and randomization was performed in blocks of four, stratified according to center. After completing the 14-day study-treatment period, patients were evaluated for 10 additional weeks. Study visits were conducted on days 1, 7, 14, 28, and 84, and patients were monitored by means of telephone calls on days 42, 56, and 70. Efficacy assessments were obtained daily by means of an interactive voice-response system over the course of the entire study (Figure 1Figure 1
Study Design.).The protocol was designed by Salix Pharmaceuticals in collaboration with the academic authors. Data were collected by investigators at each center (see the Supplementary Appendix) and were monitored by Quintiles (a contract research organization) under the supervision of Salix Pharmaceuticals. The data were analyzed by personnel at Salix Pharmaceuticals, in collaboration with the academic authors. All the authors participated in the interpretation of the data and in the writing of the manuscript. The first two authors wrote the first draft of the manuscript, and all the authors, in addition to an employee of Salix, assisted in the revision of subsequent drafts. All the authors made the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. The trial protocol, including the statistical analysis plan, is available at NEJM.org. All the authors vouch for the completeness and veracity of the data and analyses, as well as the fidelity of this report to the trial protocol.
Efficacy and Safety End Points
The primary end point was the proportion of patients who had adequate relief of global IBS symptoms for at least 2 of the 4 weeks during the primary evaluation period (weeks 3 through 6). This end point was determined from the response (yes or no) to the following question, which was asked weekly: “In regard to all your symptoms of IBS, as compared with the way you felt before you started the study medication, have you, in the past 7 days, had adequate relief of your IBS symptoms?” The threshold for clinical relevance — adequate relief during at least 2 weeks per month — was defined prospectively. In addition, the proportion of patients who reported that they had adequate relief during at least 2 weeks per month (“monthly response”) during months 1, 2, and 3 was assessed to identify the onset and duration of the therapeutic effect. Patients who started to take antibiotics (other than the study medication) or who took more than two doses of a medication that was prohibited per the study protocol were considered not to have had a response to treatment starting from the time the medication was initiated, regardless of their response data.
The key secondary end point, the proportion of patients who had adequate relief of IBS-related bloating during the primary evaluation period, was determined from the response (yes or no) to the weekly question, “In regard to your symptoms of bloating, as compared with the way you felt before you started study medication, have you, in the past 7 days, had adequate relief of your IBS symptom of bloating?” The onset and duration of relief of bloating were also assessed in an analysis of monthly response, as described above for the primary end point.
For other secondary end points, the proportion of patients who had relief was determined from the patients' daily assessments of IBS symptoms, bloating, and abdominal pain and discomfort (as rated on a 7-point scale); relief was defined as a score of either 0 (not at all) or 1 (hardly) for at least 50% of the days in a given week or a score of 0 (not at all), 1 (hardly), or 2 (somewhat) for 100% of the days in a given week for at least 2 of the 4 weeks during a given month.
An exploratory end point, which was included at the request of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), was the proportion of patients who had relief of the composite of abdominal pain and discomfort and loose or watery stools (as measured by improvement in stool consistency), on the basis of daily assessments. Relief was defined as a decrease of at least 30% from baseline in weekly mean ratings of IBS-related abdominal pain or discomfort and a weekly mean stool-consistency score of less than 4 (with 4 indicating loose stools and lower scores indicating more formed stools) for at least 2 of the 4 weeks during a given month. This exploratory end point is consistent with the recommended composite end point for IBS with diarrhea in a recently released draft of FDA guidelines.16 Safety assessments included the monitoring of adverse events, results of clinical laboratory testing, findings from physical examinations, and vital signs.
Statistical Analysis
We estimated the sample size for each study assuming that 40% of the patients in the placebo group and 55% in the rifaximin group would meet the criteria for the primary end point (i.e., would have adequate relief of global IBS symptoms, as assessed weekly) for at least 2 of the first 4 weeks after treatment. With these assumptions, a sample of 300 patients would be needed in each group for the studies to have 95% power to show the 15-percentage-point difference between the groups, at a significance level of 0.05.
All efficacy and safety analyses were performed on a modified intention-to-treat population, which included all patients who received at least one dose of the study drug. Missing data were imputed with the use of the last-observation-carried-forward method, whereby missing values were replaced with the last nonmissing value; baseline values were not carried forward. Two sensitivity analyses were conducted, one in which missing data were regarded as indicating that the patients who terminated the study prematurely had had no relief of symptoms, and the other in which missing data were imputed with the use of the multiple-imputation method.
Binary data (i.e., data on the proportion of patients who had or did not have adequate relief of symptoms) were analyzed with the use of logistic regression; fixed-effect terms included the study group and the analysis center. There were five analysis centers, which we formed prospectively by grouping the study centers according to geographic region in order to assess the effects of geographic location on the end points. For the analysis of ordinal data (i.e., data on the number of months in which patients had relief for at least 2 weeks per month), we used the proportional-odds model for the ordinal outcome. The number of consecutive months with relief during the first 3 months after treatment was summed for each patient, so that each patient received a score of 0, 1, 2, or 3.
We analyzed the changes from baseline in continuous outcomes (i.e., symptom scores) by fitting fixed-effects linear models to the data. An initial model with terms for treatment, analysis center, baseline ratings of the response variable, and interaction of baseline ratings with treatment was fitted. The interaction term was tested at the 0.05 level. A nonsignificant interaction was dropped from the model in subsequent analyses.
Spearman correlation analyses were applied to the mean change from baseline in daily assessments of adequate relief of IBS symptoms (yes or no) to determine whether the weekly assessments of adequate relief paralleled the pattern seen with the daily assessments. Safety data were summarized with the use of descriptive statistics.
Results
Study Patients
A total of 1260 patients who had IBS without constipation were enrolled in the studies (623 patients in TARGET 1 and 637 in TARGET 2) and underwent randomization at one of 179 investigative sites in the United States (1217 patients) and Canada (43 patients) (Figure 2Figure 2
Enrollment, Randomization, and Follow-up in the TARGET 1 and TARGET 2 Studies.). The studies were conducted in parallel from June 2008 through August 2009. In TARGET 1, all the patients who underwent randomization took at least one dose of the study drug. In TARGET 2, two patients (one in each group) underwent randomization but did not receive a study drug. Thus, 1258 patients received at least one dose of the study drug and were included in the modified intention-to-treat population. More than 90% of the patients completed the entire 12-week study. The baseline characteristics of the patients were similar in the two studies and across treatment groups (Table 1Table 1
Demographic and Baseline Characteristics of the Modified Intention-to-Treat Population in the Two Studies.). The rate of adherence to the study drug, defined as the use of at least 70% of the dispensed tablets, was at least 97% in both study groups in both studies.Efficacy during the Primary Evaluation Period (Weeks 3 through 6)
Adequate Relief of Global IBS Symptoms
Significantly more patients in the rifaximin group than in the placebo group met the criteria for the primary end point of adequate relief of global IBS symptoms for at least 2 of the first 4 weeks after treatment (40.8% vs. 31.2%, P=0.01, in TARGET 1; 40.6% vs. 32.2%, P=0.03, in TARGET 2; 40.7% vs. 31.7%, P<0.001, in the two studies combined) (Figure 3AFigure 3
Analyses of Primary, Key Secondary, and Other Secondary End Points.). The last-observation-carried-forward method was applied in the case of 5.8% of the patients in the rifaximin group and 5.7% of the patients in the placebo group in TARGET 1 and in the case of 5.4% in the rifaximin group and 8.4% in the placebo group in TARGET 2. Overall, sensitivity analyses that were performed to address the effect of missing values yielded results that were consistent with those of the primary efficacy analysis (see the Supplementary Appendix). On the basis of daily assessments of IBS symptoms, the proportion of patients with a response to treatment, as rated on a 7-point scale during the primary evaluation period, was significantly greater in the rifaximin group than in the placebo group (42.7% vs. 30.6%, P<0.001, in TARGET 1; 37.8% vs. 28.4%, P=0.007, in TARGET 2; 40.2% vs. 29.5%, P<0.001, in the two studies combined) (Figure 3A).Adequate Relief of IBS-Related Bloating
Significantly more patients in the rifaximin group than in the placebo group met the criteria for the key secondary end point, adequate relief of IBS-related bloating for at least 2 of the first 4 weeks after treatment (39.5% vs. 28.7%, P=0.005, in TARGET 1; 41.0% vs. 31.9%, P=0.02, in TARGET 2; 40.2% vs. 30.3%, P<0.001, in the two studies combined) (Figure 3A). Sensitivity analyses that were performed to assess the effect of missing values yielded similar results (see the Supplementary Appendix). On the basis of daily assessments of IBS-related bloating as rated on a 7-point scale during the same primary evaluation period, a significantly greater proportion of patients in the rifaximin group than in the placebo group had relief (39.2% vs. 32.5%, P=0.05, in TARGET 1; 43.5% vs. 30.9%, P<0.001, in TARGET 2; 41.3% vs. 31.7%, P<0.001, in the two studies combined) (Figure 3A).
Relief of IBS-Related Abdominal Pain and Loose or Watery Stools
A significantly greater proportion of patients in the rifaximin group than in the placebo group had relief of IBS-related abdominal pain and discomfort during the primary evaluation period (44.3% vs. 36.3%, P=0.03, in TARGET 1; 42.9% vs. 34.4%, P=0.02, in TARGET 2) (Figure 3A). In an assessment of the composite end point of abdominal pain or discomfort and loose or watery stools, significantly more patients in the rifaximin group than in the placebo group had relief during the primary evaluation period (46.6% vs. 38.5%, P=0.04, in TARGET 1; 46.7% vs. 36.3%, P=0.008, in TARGET 2), and a significantly greater proportion of patients in the rifaximin group had relief with respect to the individual components of this end point (Figure 3A).
Efficacy during the Entire Study Period (Months 1 through 3)
Durability of Response on the Basis of Weekly Assessment
In analyses of the monthly response evaluated on the basis of weekly assessments, more patients in the rifaximin group than in the placebo group in both studies had adequate relief of global IBS symptoms within the first month, with continued relief during the first 2 months and during all 3 months in both studies (P=0.05 in TARGET 1, P=0.005 in TARGET 2, and P<0.001 in the two studies combined, for relief during all 3 months) (Figure 3B). With respect to IBS-related bloating, in TARGET 1, significantly more patients in the rifaximin group than in the placebo group had adequate relief in the first month, with continued relief during the first 2 months, but there were no significant between-group differences with respect to relief during all 3 months; in TARGET 2, significant benefits of rifaximin were seen with respect to IBS-related bloating for all 3 months (P=0.10 in TARGET 1, P=0.003 in TARGET 2, and P=0.001 in the two studies combined, for relief during all 3 months) (Figure 3B). The percentages of patients in each group with adequate relief of global IBS symptoms in TARGET 1 and TARGET 2 are provided in Figure 4Figure 4
Percentage of Patients with Adequate Relief of Global IBS Symptoms in the TARGET 1 and TARGET 2 Studies Combined., and in Figure 1A and 1B in the Supplementary Appendix.Durability of Response on the Basis of Daily Assessment
The analyses of monthly response evaluated on the basis of daily assessments also support a durable response to rifaximin in patients with IBS over the course of 3 months. Patients treated with rifaximin, as compared with patients who received placebo, had adequate relief of global IBS symptoms during the entire 3 months of the study (P=0.003 in TARGET 1, P=0.01 in TARGET 2, and P<0.001 in the two studies combined) and of IBS-related bloating (P=0.01 in TARGET 1, P<0.001 in TARGET 2, and P<0.001 in the two studies combined) (Figure 3B).
An analysis of the monthly response evaluated on the basis of daily assessments of IBS-related abdominal pain and discomfort showed that significantly more patients in the rifaximin group than in the placebo group had relief for the entire 3 months (P=0.05 in TARGET 1, P=0.04 in TARGET 2, and P=0.01 in the two studies combined) (Figure 3B). An analysis of the monthly response evaluated on the basis of the assessment of the composite end point of abdominal pain and stool consistency also showed a significant benefit with rifaximin as compared with placebo (P=0.04 in TARGET 1, P=0.01 in TARGET 2, and P=0.001 in the two studies combined) (Figure 3B).
The mean improvement from baseline in daily symptom scores (global IBS symptoms, IBS-related bloating, IBS-related abdominal pain or discomfort, stool consistency, and the percentage of days with stool urgency) was greater for the patients who received rifaximin than for the patients who received placebo (Figure 2 through 6 in the Supplementary Appendix).
Responsiveness and Construct Validity of Patient-Reported Outcomes
The response of patients with respect to adequate relief of global IBS symptoms and of IBS-related bloating was consistent with the response with respect to other IBS-related assessments. In addition, patients who had adequate relief of global IBS symptoms and of IBS-related bloating had greater improvements in daily symptom-severity scores than did patients who did not have adequate relief, regardless of study group, during each week in each study (P<0.001).
We tested the validity of using assessments of global IBS symptoms to measure changes in IBS symptoms by examining the correlation between these measures and changes in daily severity scores and bowel function; the results support the validity and usefulness of the primary end point of global IBS symptoms. Evidence for convergent validity (Spearman's correlation of 0.40 or higher) was observed between weekly adequate relief of global IBS symptoms and measures of daily symptom severity and bowel function.
Safety
The safety profile of rifaximin was similar to that of placebo (Table 2Table 2
Adverse Events during the 12-Week Study.). Serious adverse events were recorded in 10 patients in the rifaximin group (1.6%) and 15 patients in the placebo group (2.4%). There were no cases of Clostridium difficile–associated diarrhea or ischemic colitis. No deaths were reported. Discussion
Treating IBS is important because the symptoms cause substantial impairment in health-related quality of life, leading to increased use of health resources and reduced work productivity.17-20 These two phase 3 studies showed that a short course of rifaximin leads to sustained amelioration of the symptoms of IBS without constipation in a subgroup of affected patients.
The antibiotic effect of rifaximin is the presumed mechanism for its sustained beneficial effects in patients with IBS. A response to antibiotic therapy in patients with IBS has been shown to correlate with normalization of the results of lactulose hydrogen breath tests.8,13 However, there is debate about which antibiotic-related effect is most important. On the basis of existing data, there are three reasonable explanations: rifaximin affects gut bacteria and reduces bacterial products that negatively affect the host, the effect on gut flora reduces local mucosal engagement of bacteria such as the immune responses of the host, or the antibiotic alters both the bacteria and the host response. Whatever the final pathway, the durable effects suggest that rifaximin is affecting an underlying cause of IBS that is linked to an alteration in the intestinal microbiota.6,7,21,22 Some patients in both of our studies did not have a response to treatment, a finding that is consistent with the results of other placebo-controlled clinical trials involving patients with IBS23-25 and that may reflect differences in the underlying cause of the symptoms.
Similar percentages of patients in the rifaximin group and in the placebo group had adverse events. In this short-term study, the incidence of infections was similar in the two groups, and there were no cases of C. difficile–associated diarrhea or ischemic colitis.
In summary, the results of these two phase 3 studies showed that treatment with rifaximin at a dose of 550 mg three times daily for 14 days provides better relief of symptoms of IBS than does placebo for up to 10 weeks after completion of therapy.
Supported by Salix Pharmaceuticals.
Dr. Pimentel reports receiving grant support (to his institution) and consulting fees and honoraria from Salix Pharmaceuticals and reports that Cedars–Sinai Medical Center holds patents licensed by Salix Pharmaceuticals; Dr. Lembo reports receiving consulting fees from Salix Pharmaceuticals, Ironwood Pharmaceuticals, Prometheus, Ardelyx, Theravance, GlaxoSmithKline, and AstraZeneca, receiving payment for participation in several advisory-board meetings relating to the development of rifaximin for the treatment of IBS, and receiving payment as a member of the speakers' bureau of Salix Pharmaceuticals; Dr. Chey reports receiving consulting fees and honoraria from Procter & Gamble, Ortho-McNeil, Prometheus, and Salix Pharmaceuticals, payment for the development of educational presentations, and payment or reimbursement for travel and accommodations from Procter & Gamble, Prometheus, and Salix Pharmaceuticals; Dr. Zakko reports receiving grant support (to his institution), consulting fees, payment for the development of educational presentations, and payment or reimbursement for travel and accommodations from Salix Pharmaceuticals and holding stock in Salix Pharmaceuticals; Dr. Ringel reports receiving consulting fees from Salix Pharmaceuticals, Ironwood Pharmaceuticals, Procter & Gamble, Pfizer, and Danisco, participating in several advisory-board meetings related to the development of rifaximin for the treatment of IBS, receiving payment for the development of educational presentations and as a member of the speakers' bureau of Salix Pharmaceuticals, and receiving research grants from Danisco USA, General Mills, and SmartPill. Drs. Yu, Mareya, and Bortey report being employees of and holding stock in Salix Pharmaceuticals; Dr. Shaw reports being an employee of Salix Pharmaceuticals and reports that she holds stock in the company; and Dr. Forbes reports being an officer and employee of Salix Pharmaceuticals and holding stock in the company.
Disclosure forms provided by the authors are available with the full text of this article at NEJM.org.
No other potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.
We thank Kristofer Klein, M.S. (Salix Pharmaceuticals), for assistance with the preparation of the manuscript.
Source Information
From Cedars–Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles (M.P.); Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School — both in Boston (A.L.); University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor (W.D.C.); Connecticut Gastroenterology Institute at Bristol Hospital, Bristol (S.Z.); University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill (Y.R.); and Salix Pharmaceuticals, Morrisville, NC (J.Y., S.M.M., A.L.S., E.B., W.P.F.).
Address reprint requests to Dr. Forbes at 1700 Perimeter Park Dr., Morrisville, NC 27560.
Members of the TARGET Study Group are listed in the Supplementary Appendix, available at NEJM.org.
- References
References
1
Brandt LJ ,Chey WD ,Foxx-Orenstein AE , et al. An evidence-based systematic review on the management of irritable bowel syndrome. Am J Gastroenterol 2009;104:Suppl 1:S1-S35
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline2
Cash BD ,Chey WD . Advances in the management of irritable bowel syndrome. Curr Gastroenterol Rep 2003;5:468-475
CrossRef | Medline3
Schoenfeld P . Efficacy of current drug therapies in irritable bowel syndrome: what works and does not work. Gastroenterol Clin North Am 2005;34:319-335
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline4
Spiegel B ,Camilleri M ,Bolus R , et al. Psychometric evaluation of patient-reported outcomes in irritable bowel syndrome randomized controlled trials: a Rome Foundation report. Gastroenterology 2009;137:1944-1953
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline5
Ringel Y ,Carroll IM . Alterations in the intestinal microbiota and functional bowel symptoms. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 2009;19:141-150
CrossRef | Medline6
Posserud I ,Stotzer P ,Bjornsson E ,Abrahamsson H ,Simren M . Small intestinal bacterial overgrowth in patients with irritable bowel syndrome. Gut 2007;56:802-808
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline7
Kassinen A ,Krogius-Kurikka L ,Makivuokko H , et al. The fecal microbiota of irritable bowel syndrome patients differs significantly from that of healthy subjects. Gastroenterology 2007;133:24-33
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline8
Pimentel M ,Chow EJ ,Lin HC . Normalization of lactulose breath testing correlates with symptom improvement in irritable bowel syndrome: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study. Am J Gastroenterol 2003;98:412-419
Web of Science | Medline9
Attar A ,Flourie B ,Rambaud J-C ,Franchisseur C ,Ruszniewski P ,Bouhnik Y . Antibiotic efficacy in small intestinal bacterial overgrowth-related chronic diarrhea: a crossover, randomized trial. Gastroenterology 1999;117:794-797
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline10
Gerard L ,Garey KW ,DuPont HL . Rifaximin, a nonabsorbable rifamycin antibiotic for use in nonsystemic gastrointestinal infections. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther 2005;3:201-211
CrossRef | Medline11
Jiang ZD ,DuPont HL . Rifaximin: in vitro and in vivo antibacterial activity -- a review. Chemotherapy 2005;51:Suppl:67-72
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline12
Debbia EA ,Maioli E ,Roveta S ,Marchese A . Effects of rifaximin on bacterial virulence mechanisms at supra- and sub-inhibitory concentrations. J Chemother 2008;20:186-194
Web of Science | Medline13
Sharara AI ,Aoun E ,Abdul-Baki H ,Mounzer R ,Sidani S ,Elhajj I . A randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial of rifaximin in patients with abdominal bloating and flatulence. Am J Gastroenterol 2006;101:326-333
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline14
Pimentel M ,Park S ,Mirocha J ,Kane SV ,Kong Y . The effect of a nonabsorbed oral antibiotic (rifaximin) on the symptoms of the irritable bowel syndrome: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2006;145:557-563
Web of Science | Medline15
Thompson WG ,Longstreth GF ,Drossman DA ,Heaton KW ,Irvine EJ ,Muller-Lissner SA . Functional bowel disorders and functional abdominal pain. Gut 1999;45:Suppl 2:1143-114716
Guidance for industry: irritable bowel syndrome: clinical evaluation of products for treatment. Silver Spring, MD: Food and Drug Administration Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) and Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), March 2010.
17
Drossman DA ,Li Z ,Andruzzi E , et al. U.S. householder survey of functional gastrointestinal disorders: prevalence, sociodemography, and health impact. Dig Dis Sci 1993;38:1569-1580
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline18
Camilleri M ,Andresen V . Current and novel therapeutic options for irritable bowel syndrome management. Dig Liver Dis 2009;41:854-862
CrossRef | Medline19
Hammerle CW ,Surawicz CM . Updates on treatment of irritable bowel syndrome. World J Gastroenterol 2008;14:2639-2649
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline20
El-Serag HB . Impact of irritable bowel syndrome: prevalence and effect on health-related quality of life. Rev Gastroenterol Disord 2003;3:Suppl 2:S3-S11
Medline21
Pimentel M . Review of rifaximin as treatment for SIBO and IBS. Expert Opin Investig Drugs 2009;18:349-358
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline22
Brigidi P ,Swennen E ,Rizzello F ,Bozzolasco M ,Matteuzzi D . Effects of rifaximin administration on the intestinal microbiota in patients with ulcerative colitis. J Chemother 2002;14:290-295
Web of Science | Medline23
Lotronex (alosetron hydrochloride) tablets. San Diego, CA: Prometheus Laboratories, 2008 (package insert).
24
Zelnorm (tegaserod maleate) tablets. East Hanover, NJ: Novartis Pharmaceuticals, 2007 (package insert).
25
Amitiza (lubiprostone) capsules. Deerfield, IL: Takeda Pharmaceuticals America, 2008 (package insert).
- Citing Articles (63)
Citing Articles
1
2013. I. , 567-594.
CrossRef2
Leonard B WEINSTOCK, Suzie ZEISS. (2012) Rifaximin antibiotic treatment for restless legs syndrome: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Sleep and Biological Rhythmsno-no
CrossRef3
Eric Shah, Sharon Kim, Kelly Chong, Anthony Lembo, Mark Pimentel. (2012) Evaluation of Harm in the Pharmacotherapy of Irritable Bowel Syndrome. The American Journal of Medicine 125:4, 381-393
CrossRef4
F. Geijo Martínez, C. Piñero Pérez, R. Calderón Begazo, A. Álvarez Delgado, A. Rodríguez Pérez. (2012) Síndrome del intestino irritable. Medicine - Programa de Formación Médica Continuada Acreditado 11:6, 325-330
CrossRef5
Matthew A. Ciorba. (2012) A Gastroenterologist's Guide to Probiotics. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology
CrossRef6
Cosimo Prantera, Herbert Lochs, Maria Grimaldi, Silvio Danese, Maria Lia Scribano, Paolo Gionchetti. (2012) Rifaximin-Extended Intestinal Release Induces Remission in Patients With Moderately Active Crohn's Disease. Gastroenterology 142:3, 473-481.e4
CrossRef7
Diana L. Wadlund. (2012) Meeting the challenge of IBS. The Nurse Practitioner1
CrossRef8
I. M. Carroll, T. Ringel-Kulka, J. P. Siddle, Y. Ringel. (2012) Alterations in composition and diversity of the intestinal microbiota in patients with diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome. Neurogastroenterology & Motilityno-no
CrossRef9
Margaret D. Eugenio, Sang-Eun Jun, Kevin C. Cain, Monica E. Jarrett, Margaret M. Heitkemper. (2012) Comprehensive Self-Management Reduces the Negative Impact of Irritable Bowel Syndrome Symptoms on Sexual Functioning. Digestive Diseases and Sciences
CrossRef10
Emmannouil Pyleris, Evangelos J. Giamarellos-Bourboulis, Dimitrios Tzivras, Vassilios Koussoulas, Charalambos Barbatzas, Mark Pimentel. (2012) The Prevalence of Overgrowth by Aerobic Bacteria in the Small Intestine by Small Bowel Culture: Relationship with Irritable Bowel Syndrome. Digestive Diseases and Sciences
CrossRef11
Monte Malach, William J. Baumol. (2012) Opportunities for Cost Reduction of Medical Care: Part 3. Journal of Community Health
CrossRef12
Filippo Cremonini, Anthony Lembo. (2012) Drug evaluation: rifaximin for the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome. Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy1-8
CrossRef13
M Camilleri. (2012) Pharmacology of the New Treatments for Lower Gastrointestinal Motility Disorders and Irritable Bowel Syndrome. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics 91:1, 44-59
CrossRef14
Saad F Habba. (2012) Perhaps it is time to rethink IBS-D. Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology 47:1, 122-123
CrossRef15
B. Issa, N. A. Wafaei, P. J. Whorwell. (2012) Abdominal Bloating and Distension: What Is the Role of the Microbiota. Digestive Diseases and Sciences 57:1, 4-8
CrossRef16
G. C. Parkes, N. B. Rayment, B. N. Hudspith, L. Petrovska, M. C. Lomer, J. Brostoff, K. Whelan, J. D. Sanderson. (2012) Distinct microbial populations exist in the mucosa-associated microbiota of sub-groups of irritable bowel syndrome. Neurogastroenterology & Motility 24:1, 31-39
CrossRef17
Stacy B Menees, Monthira Maneerattannaporn, Hyungjin Myra Kim, William D Chey. (2012) The Efficacy and Safety of Rifaximin for the Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. The American Journal of Gastroenterology 107:1, 28-35
CrossRef18
Lucinda A. Harris, Margaret M. Heitkemper. (2012) Practical Considerations for Recognizing and Managing Severe Irritable Bowel Syndrome. Gastroenterology Nursing 35:1, 12-21
CrossRef19
J.A. Stockman. (2012) Rifaximin Therapy for Patients with Irritable Bowel Syndrome without Constipation. Yearbook of Pediatrics 2012, 153-154
CrossRef20
Adil E. Bharucha, Simon J.H. Brookes. 2012. Neurophysiologic Mechanisms of Human Large Intestinal Motility. , 977-1022.
CrossRef21
Uday C. Ghoshal, Ratnakar Shukla, Ujjala Ghoshal, Kok-Ann Gwee, Siew C. Ng, Eamonn M. M. Quigley. (2012) The Gut Microbiota and Irritable Bowel Syndrome: Friend or Foe?. International Journal of Inflammation 2012, 1-13
CrossRef22
Robin Spiller. (2012) Is It Diverticular Disease or Is It Irritable Bowel Syndrome?. Digestive Diseases 30:1, 64-69
CrossRef23
Kenneth Mcquaid. 2012. Approach to the Patient with Gastrointestinal Disease. , 828-844.
CrossRef24
Emeran A. Mayer. 2012. Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders. , 868-874.
CrossRef25
Francisco Guarner. (2011) The Enteric Microbiota. Colloquium Series on Integrated Systems Physiology: From Molecule to Function 3:9, 1-88
CrossRef26
K. W. Garey, S. S. Ghantoji, D. N. Shah, M. Habib, V. Arora, Z.-D. Jiang, H. L. DuPont. (2011) A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study to assess the ability of rifaximin to prevent recurrent diarrhoea in patients with Clostridium difficile infection. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 66:12, 2850-2855
CrossRef27
Nicholas J. Talley, Anthony A. Fodor. (2011) Bugs, Stool, and the Irritable Bowel Syndrome: Too Much Is as Bad as Too Little?. Gastroenterology 141:5, 1555-1559
CrossRef28
Delphine M. Saulnier, Kevin Riehle, Toni–Ann Mistretta, Maria–Alejandra Diaz, Debasmita Mandal, Sabeen Raza, Erica M. Weidler, Xiang Qin, Cristian Coarfa, Aleksandar Milosavljevic, Joseph F. Petrosino, Sarah Highlander, Richard Gibbs, Susan V. Lynch, Robert J. Shulman, James Versalovic. (2011) Gastrointestinal Microbiome Signatures of Pediatric Patients With Irritable Bowel Syndrome. Gastroenterology 141:5, 1782-1791
CrossRef29
Andrea Mencarelli, Barbara Renga, Giuseppe Palladino, D'Amore Claudio, Patrizia Ricci, Eleonora Distrutti, Miriam Barbanti, Franco Baldelli, Stefano Fiorucci. (2011) Inhibition of NF-κB by a PXR-dependent pathway mediates counter-regulatory activities of rifaximin on innate immunity in intestinal epithelial cells. European Journal of Pharmacology 668:1-2, 317-324
CrossRef30
Giovanni Maconi, Giovanni Barbara, Cristina Bosetti, Rosario Cuomo, Bruno Annibale. (2011) Treatment of Diverticular Disease of the Colon and Prevention of Acute Diverticulitis: A Systematic Review. Diseases of the Colon & Rectum 54:10, 1326-1338
CrossRef31
Herbert L. DuPont. (2011) Gastrointestinal infections and the development of irritable bowel syndrome. Current Opinion in Infectious Diseases 24:5, 503-508
CrossRef32
Matthew S. Chang, Maria T. Minaya, Jianfeng Cheng, Bradley A. Connor, Suzanne K. Lewis, Peter H. R. Green. (2011) Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial of Rifaximin for Persistent Symptoms in Patients with Celiac Disease. Digestive Diseases and Sciences 56:10, 2939-2946
CrossRef33
Brooks D. Cash. (2011) Non-Absorbed Antibiotic for Irritable Bowel Syndrome. Current Gastroenterology Reports 13:5, 398-401
CrossRef34
Michael Camilleri, Carlo Di Lorenzo. (2011) The Brain-Gut Axis. Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition1
CrossRef35
Eamonn M.M. Quigley. (2011) Commensal bacteria. Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition and Metabolic Care 14:5, 497-503
CrossRef36
Andrew W. DuPont, Herbert L. DuPont. (2011) The intestinal microbiota and chronic disorders of the gut. Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology 8:9, 523-531
CrossRef37
C. N. Andrews, T. A. Griffiths, J. Kaufman, N. Vergnolle, M. G. Surette, K. P. Rioux. (2011) Mesalazine (5-aminosalicylic acid) alters faecal bacterial profiles, but not mucosal proteolytic activity in diarrhoea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics 34:3, 374-383
CrossRef38
Mark Pimentel, Walter Morales, Kathleen Chua, Gillian Barlow, Stacy Weitsman, Gene Kim, Meridythe M. Amichai, Venkata Pokkunuri, Emily Rook, Ruchi Mathur, Zachary Marsh. (2011) Effects of Rifaximin Treatment and Retreatment in Nonconstipated IBS Subjects. Digestive Diseases and Sciences 56:7, 2067-2072
CrossRef39
Anastasia Rivkin, Suzanna Gim. (2011) Rifaximin: New Therapeutic Indication and Future Directions. Clinical Therapeutics 33:7, 812-827
CrossRef40
Ron Schey, Satish SC Rao. (2011) The role of rifaximin therapy in patients with irritable bowel syndrome without constipation. Expert Review of Gastroenterology & Hepatology 5:4, 461-464
CrossRef41
Brennan M.R. Spiegel. (2011) Questioning the Bacterial Overgrowth Hypothesis of Irritable Bowel Syndrome: An Epidemiologic and Evolutionary Perspective. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 9:6, 461-469
CrossRef42
Christopher W. Hammerle, Sheila E. Crowe. (2011) When to Reconsider the Diagnosis of Irritable Bowel Syndrome. Gastroenterology Clinics of North America 40:2, 291-307
CrossRef43
Ruben D Acosta, Brooks D Cash. (2011) Existing and emerging therapies for irritable bowel syndrome. Expert Opinion on Emerging Drugs 16:2, 389-402
CrossRef44
M. Schmulson, L. Chang. (2011) Review article: the treatment of functional abdominal bloating and distension. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics 33:10, 1071-1086
CrossRef45
Muriel Larauche, Agata Mulak, Yvette Taché. (2011) Stress and visceral pain: From animal models to clinical therapies. Experimental Neurology
CrossRef46
(2011) Rifaximin for Irritable Bowel Syndrome without Constipation. New England Journal of Medicine 364:15, 1467-1468
Full Text47
Alexander C. Ford, Nicholas J. Talley. (2011) Mucosal inflammation as a potential etiological factor in irritable bowel syndrome: a systematic review. Journal of Gastroenterology 46:4, 421-431
CrossRef48
Eamonn MM Quigley. (2011) Antibiotics in irritable bowel syndrome: a novel approach to a challenging disorder. Clinical Investigation 1:4, 479-482
CrossRef49
Eamonn M.M. Quigley. (2011) Therapies Aimed at the Gut Microbiota and Inflammation: Antibiotics, Prebiotics, Probiotics, Synbiotics, Anti-inflammatory Therapies. Gastroenterology Clinics of North America 40:1, 207-222
CrossRef50
Flint Russett. (2011) Hospital Pharmacy Pulse - Recent Publications on Medications and Pharmacy. Hospital Pharmacy 46:3, 225-227
CrossRef51
Mark Pimentel, Christopher Chang. (2011) Inflammation and Microflora. Gastroenterology Clinics of North America 40:1, 69-85
CrossRef52
Jochen Cals. (2011) Opluchting voor prikkelbare darmen?. Huisarts en wetenschap 2011:4, 183-183
CrossRef53
Shreeya Nanda. (2011) IBS: Rifaximin provides effective and sustained relief of IBS symptoms. Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology 8:3, 121-121
CrossRef54
Tack, Jan, . (2011) Antibiotic Therapy for the Irritable Bowel Syndrome. New England Journal of Medicine 364:1, 81-82
Full Text55
Muriel Larauche, Agata Mulak, Yvette Taché. (2011) Stress-Related Alterations of Visceral Sensation: Animal Models for Irritable Bowel Syndrome Study. Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility 17:3, 213
CrossRef56
Giovanni Barbara, Cesare Cremon, Giovanni Carini, Lara Bellacosa, Lisa Zecchi, Roberto De Giorgio, Roberto Corinaldesi, Vincenzo Stanghellini. (2011) The Immune System in Irritable Bowel Syndrome. Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility 17:4, 349
CrossRef57
Beom Jae Lee, Young-Tae Bak. (2011) Irritable Bowel Syndrome, Gut Microbiota and Probiotics. Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility 17:3, 252
CrossRef58
Eamonn M M Quigley. (2011) Microflora Modulation of Motility. Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility 17:2, 140
CrossRef59
Uday C Ghoshal, Deepakshi Srivastava, Abhai Verma, Asha Misra. (2011) Slow Transit Constipation Associated With Excess Methane Production and Its Improvement Following Rifaximin Therapy: A Case Report. Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility 17:2, 185
CrossRef60
Yehuda Ringel, Tamar Ringel-Kulka. (2011) The Rationale and Clinical Effectiveness of Probiotics in Irritable Bowel Syndrome. Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology 45, S145-S148
CrossRef61
William D. Chey, Monthira Maneerattaporn, Richard Saad. (2011) Pharmacologic and Complementary and Alternative Medicine Therapies for Irritable Bowel Syndrome. Gut and Liver 5:3, 253
CrossRef62
N.J. Talley. (2011) Combined oro-caecal scintigraphy and lactulose hydrogen breath testing demonstrate that breath testing detects oro-caecal transit, not small intestinal bacterial overgrowth in patients with IBS. Yearbook of Gastroenterology 2011, 65-68
CrossRef63
N.J. Talley. (2011) Rifaximin Therapy for Patients with Irritable Bowel Syndrome without Constipation. Yearbook of Gastroenterology 2011, 79-81
CrossRef
- Comments (8)
-
8 Reader's Comments
DAVID GLUCK, MD | Physician - Preventive Medicine | Disclosure: NoneNEW YORK NYJanuary 06, 2011Available treatment for IBS
This study is problematic in several ways, not least of which is the long list of companies involved, and somehow attached to the trial's outcome.
Five years ago, Pain Therapeutics, Inc. announced failure of its Phase III study of IBS with PTI-901, whose active ingredient was an ultra-low naltrexone dosage of 0.5mg.
That company made a serious error. It transpires that low dose naltrexone (NOT ultra-low) in a range of anywhere from 1.75mg to 4.5mg daily would probably have done just fine. Because naltrexone at 50mg (the FDA-approved dosage for narcotic addiction and alcoholism) has been a generic for many years now, any new commercial possibilities have been discounted.
Nonetheless, because of the safety and efficacy of naltrexone in this low range, small and successful trials continue to pop up – and from excellent medical centers: Crohn’s disease (Hershey Med Ctr); fibromyalgia (Stanford); and multiple sclerosis (UCSF). A successful Phase II of Crohn's with 4.5mg naltrexone awaits publication. Anecdotal reports of success with IBS at that dose range are very common. No side effects, no toxicity, non-commercial, effective and inexpensive. Just Google "LDN" for information.ANDRES ORTIZ, MD | Physician | Disclosure: NoneCARACAS VenezuelaJanuary 06, 2011The IBS Poly Pill?
Even though bacterial over growth may play a roll in Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS), it is definitely not the only pathobiological mechanism in the production of symptoms in IBS. Therefore, future treatments should aim to control a wide variety of undelying of causes of IBS and not only one cause....
Wendy Jeffries | Other | Disclosure: NoneJanuary 06, 2011Rifaximin Therapy for IBS
I am a 52 year old female who has suffered with IBS since my teens. I am very interested in the study by the NEJM about the role an antibiotic can play in the relief of the symptons. In October of 2010 I was prescribed Azithromycin and noticed my symptons disappeared for a couple of weeks. I just mentioned this to my family last night and then today heard about this study. I would love to be able to have a life without IBS. I am going to discuss this article with my family doctor.
KIMBERLY CUSATO, MD | Physician | Disclosure: NoneALAMEDA CAJanuary 06, 2011IBS
As a practicing gastroenterologist for 12 years as well as an IBS sufferer for almost 40, I realized long ago that we cannot treat IBS with a pill and that IBS is for life, and not for 10 weeks. I have been following Dr. Pimental's studies for years, and I have yet to see anything last as long as the stress and psychological manipulation techniques that I and many others have been advocating for years. (The hypnosis studies out of Great Britain 10 years ago showed benefits 2 years and beyond for 80% of patients, which far overshadows an 11% improvement over 10 weeks.) IBS patients are frustrated and want a quick fix, and I believe these kind of studies are offering false hope and demand for expensive medicines like Xifaxan. The AGA press has come out with a "Mastering Your IBS" book that I believe offers a more comprehensive and educational treatment approach that is far more likely to result in long term reduction in symptoms. I think approaches like this (which mirrors what I have been teaching in my Functional Bowel Disorders Class 3 times a month for the past 8 years) should get more press than this study.
MICHAEL ELIASTAM, MD | Physician - Health Law/Ethics/Public Policy | Disclosure: NoneWESTON MAJanuary 06, 2011Here we go!
Here we go on another journey into a poorly supported area of new treatment.......this article barely shows a statistically signifincant difference, and certainly not a convincing one. Why in the background do I hear 'Glucosamine works for joint pain', or 'Echinacea cures colds'?
So, off we go, lots of hype already this morning, on CNN and the rest. Soon, patients are begging their physician to give it to them, and celebrities are advocating for it, and the probiotic companies will find a way to link their unproven 'cures' to this report. Why can't we wait for a few more reports that actually confirm this before we go public? What is it about the modern medical establishment that does this so easily and yet bemoans the sorry state of poorly educated patients demanding new and expensive treatments?MS CAROL SIDOFSKY | Other | Disclosure: NoneWINTER PARK COJanuary 05, 2011Probiotics & no milk or gluten, for irritable bowel:
You wrote: "Evidence suggests that gut flora may play an important role in the pathophysiology of the irritable bowel syndrome (IBS)." Therefore, instead of promoting Clostridium difficile, and other intestinal infections, by giving antibiotics, why not use oral bacterial probiotics (Acidophilus, Bifidus), and a friendly probiotic yeast, (Saccharomyces boulardii), instead of antibiotics?
Also, analyze stool samples, to see if patients are sensitive to gluten &/or other proteins (e.g., milk proteins, soy proteins, yeast proteins, egg proteins). Patients should also avoid corn proteins. For those unable to tolerate S. boulardii beneficial yeast, consider IVIG (intravenous immune globulin), or, use Duluth Clinic's stool transfer protocols, which help original stool bacterioides to re-grow.Patsy Catsos | Other | Disclosure: NoneJanuary 05, 2011Keep the data coming!
There is a real thirst for hard data of this kind about the role of gut flora in IBS and other functional gut disorders. As a dietitian treating patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), I am frequently asked about small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO), which is easy to read about on the internet but difficult to learn about from evidence-based sources. The authors of this article do not comment on IBS vs. SIBO or on how the treatment with Rifaximin therapy works to relieve IBS symptoms: What types of bacteria are the targets of Rifaximin therapy? Where are they present--small or large intestine? What is the role of diet--would limiting intake of highly fermentable carbohydrates (following a FODMAPs elimination diet) complement treatment with Rifaximin by depriving gas-producing gut bacteria of their favorite food? I will be following the work of these authors as they search for the answers.
- Letters
Sustainable Benefits??
Encouraging and hopeful results for some who have this life altering health concern. Is there continuing research on those who received benefit from the medication to determine if there is a sustainable positive effect on IBS symptoms? Or is this is a time limited benefit that will require intermittent antibiotic administration to keep the IBS symptoms controlled?