ReviewZeitschrift fur Gastroenterologie2025
From guidelines to evidence-based practice - A German perspective on mesalazine as first-line therapy for mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis.
Review in Zeitschrift fur Gastroenterologie, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Combined therapy with vitamin D, mesalazine, and microecological preparations improves clinical outcome in ulcerative colitis.American journal of translational research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mesalazine is the first-line treatment for mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis (UC) of any extent, as recommended by all major international and national guidelines. Approximately 85% of UC cases are classified as mild-to-moderate, making mesalazine a cornerstone therapy for the majority of patients. It rapidly induces clinical response and clinical remission, sustains steroid-free clinical, endoscopic, and histologic remission over the long term, and has a safety profile comparable to placebo. This paper reviews the recommendations for mesalazine use in the German UC guideline and provides practical advice (including do's and don'ts) for their implementation in daily clinical practice. Examples include explaining the expected timeline and nature of the clinical response to mesalazine treatment; outlining the practical implications of the dose-dependency of the drug's therapeutic effect; and emphasizing the importance of rectal mesalazine as the first-line treatment for proctitis. Additionally, we conducted a systematic literature search to evaluate whether mesalazine should be continued after escalation to biologics or small molecules. While no clear evidence of short-term clinical benefit was found, there was also no evidence of harm. In light of the potential long-term chemoprotective effect of mesalazine, continuation may be considered on a case-by-case basis. Lastly, we provide an overview of the various mesalazine formulations available in Germany, detailing how they are not interchangeable due to differences in drug-release profiles, excipients, and dosing strengths. Understanding these differences may help clinicians personalize treatment, improving adherence and clinical outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.