HealingWell
Search Close Search
☰

FMT News

Support Forums
>
Ulcerative Colitis
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply
❬ ❬ Previous Thread |Next Thread ❭ ❭
Posted 8/11/2014 4:48 PM (GMT 0)
Fecal Transplants for IBD Show Mixed Results in Trials
Chicago—Fecal transplant has reached a critical milestone: testing in the first randomized controlled trial of the therapy to treat inflammatory bowel disease.

Although this step might be good for science, the news was not quite so encouraging for patients. The treatment did not appear to be better than placebo transplant at alleviating symptoms of ulcerative colitis (UC), according to the researchers.

The findings showed that four FMT recipients (15%) and two placebo subjects (8%) achieved clinical remission, defined as a Mayo score of 2 or less and an endoscopic Mayo score of 0, a difference that was not statistically significant. Seven FMT patients (26%) and eight placebo recipients (31%) experienced improvements of at least 30% in their Mayo scores.
Posted 8/11/2014 4:49 PM (GMT 0)
Couldn't get link to work
Posted 8/11/2014 5:40 PM (GMT 0)
Fixed link.

Best.
Posted 8/11/2014 5:47 PM (GMT 0)
Mine says webpage not available still :(
Posted 8/11/2014 7:13 PM (GMT 0)
Placebo transplant? That's kind of funny. I wonder who cooks that up?
Posted 8/11/2014 8:23 PM (GMT 0)
Well, now we have the results of the McMaster study. No magic bullet.

It is interesting that the success seems a little higher in pediatric patients in some of the other studies.

I still think this is leading to customized probiotic therapies. When Dr. Brant says “It may be that we need to look at the patient’s unique bacterial composition and determine which organisms need to replaced, and formulate FMT accordingly.” - well, I hear custom designed probiotic treatment (whether oral or anal).

For the life of me I don;t know why he said "formulate FMT" accordingly, since any "formulation" is going to involve combining purified strains, and is not going to involve combining fecal matter.
Posted 8/11/2014 8:49 PM (GMT 0)
there is the possibility that FMT may be effective when administered longer than six weeks

Although I don't want to get into the details of this particular study or mention the flaws, I believe there are only a few qualified professionals who should be constructing a study like this. You either do it wrong or you do it right - there is no middle ground. They went on to mention that the time frame was insignificant. I think it goes without saying that the optimal way to do FMT is the way Hurst did it... that is with additional tools, medications (temporary) and supplementation to facilitate the healing process.

For the life of me and I haven't been able to figure this out yet (well actually I have but no one is going to believe me, so I don't want to explain) is how someone who is literally at the surgery table, awaiting colon removal and then poof... he has no more UC pathology, after 11 years of debilitating pancolitis pathology and even with the gamut of medications. Then he mocks me everyday by taking no medications and eating whatever he wants. It begs worth looking into and even pouring millions in - that would be the cure.

Again, science has a long way to go but I think we'll get to that level. :)

Best to all.
Posted 8/11/2014 11:29 PM (GMT 0)
[Quote]Roughly 45% in both groups had pancolitis. During the study, 42% of subjects received corticosteroids, 19% continued with immunosuppressive treatment and 9% continued with biologic therapy.

Based on the drugs they were on, these patients must have been pretty far gone. They didn't get antiobiotics pre FMT and they didn't get daily, but instead only weekly infusions.

I don't understand why these studies come along and execute a half-assed approach when there is considerable evidence that daily infusions and pre infusion antibiotics are giving better results.

Post Edited (07vNH) : 11/25/2014 7:46:34 AM (GMT-7)

✚ New Topic ✚ Reply