Duodenal administered seal oil for patients with subjective food hypersensitivity: an explorative open pilot study

Short-term duodenal administration of n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA)-rich seal oil may improve gastrointestinal complaints in patients with subjective food hypersensitivity, as well as joint pain in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The aim of the present explorative pilot study was to investigate whether 10-day open treatment with seal oil, 10 mL self-administrated via a nasoduodenal tube 3 times daily, could also benefit nongastrointestinal complaints and quality of life (QoL) in patients with subjective food hypersensitivity. Twenty-six patients with subjective food hypersensitivity, of whom 25 had irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), were included in the present study. Before and after treatment and 1 month posttreatment, patients filled in the Ulcer Esophagitis Subjective Symptoms Scale (UESS) and the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS) for gastrointestinal symptoms and subjective health complaints (SHC) inventory for nongastrointestinal symptoms in addition to short form of the Nepean dyspepsia index (SF-NDI) for evaluation of QoL. Compared with baseline, gastrointestinal, as well as nongastrointestinal, complaints and QoL improved significantly, both at end of treatment and 1 month posttreatment. The consistent improvements following seal oil administration warrant further placebo-controlled trials for confirmation of effect

Short-term duodenal seal oil administration normalised n-6 to n-3 fatty acid ratio in rectal mucosa and ameliorated bodily pain in patients with inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND: A high dietary intake of n-6 compared to n-3 fatty acids (FAs) may promote the production of pro-inflammatory eicosanoids and cytokines. In two recent studies, short-term (10-day) duodenal administration of n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid rich seal oil ameliorated joint pain in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Using unpublished data from these two studies we here investigated whether normalisation of the n-6 to n-3 FA ratio in blood and tissues by seal oil administration was associated with improved health related quality of life (HRQOL) as assessed by the generic short-form 36 (SF-36) questionnaire. RESULTS: In the first pilot study, baseline n-6 to n-3 FA ratio in rectal mucosal biopsies from 10 patients with IBD (9 of those had joint pain) was significantly increased compared with that in 10 control patients without IBD or joint pain. Following seal oil administration, the n-6 to n-3 FA ratio of the IBD-patients was significantly lowered to the level seen in untreated controls. In the subsequent, randomized controlled study (n = 19), seal oil administration reduced the n-6 to n-3 FA ratio in blood similarly and also the SF-36 assessed bodily pain, while n-6 FA rich soy oil administration had no such effect. CONCLUSION: In these two separate studies, short-term duodenal administration of seal oil normalised the n-6 to n-3 FA ratio in rectal mucosa and improved the bodily pain dimension of HRQOL of patients with IBD-related joint pain. The possibility of a causal relationship between n-6 to n-3 FA ratio in rectal mucosa and bodily pain in IBD-patients warrants further investigations

Exploring the opportunities for alignment of regulatory postauthorization requirements and data required for performance-based managed entry agreements

Performance-based managed entry agreements (PB-MEAs) might allow patient access to new medicines, but practical hurdles make competent authorities for pricing and reimbursement (CAPR) reluctant to implement PB-MEAs. We explored if the feasibility of PB-MEAs might improve by better aligning regulatory postauthorization requirements with the data generation of PB-MEAs and by active collaboration and data sharing. Reviewers from seven CAPRs provided structured assessments of the information available at the European Medicines Agency (EMA) Web site on regulatory postauthorization requirements for fifteen recently authorized products. The reviewers judged to what extent regulatory postauthorization studies could help implement PB-MEAs by addressing uncertainty gaps. Study domains assessed were: patient population, intervention, comparators, outcomes, time horizon, anticipated data quality, and anticipated robustness of analysis. Reviewers shared general comments about PB-MEAs for each product and on cooperation with other CAPRs. Reviewers rated regulatory postauthorization requirements at least partly helpful for most products and across domains except the comparator domain. One quarter of responses indicated that public information provided by the EMA was insufficient to support the implementation of PB-MEAs. Few PB-MEAs were in place for these products, but the potential for implementation of PB-MEAs or collaboration across CAPRs was seen as more favorable. Responses helped delineate a set of conditions where PB-MEAs may help reduce uncertainty. In conclusion, PB-MEAs are not a preferred option for CAPRs, but we identified conditions where PB-MEAs might be worth considering. The complexities of implementing PB-MEAs remain a hurdle, but collaboration across silos and more transparency on postauthorization studies could help overcome some barriers

Exploring the opportunities for alignment of regulatory postauthorization requirements and data required for performance-based managed entry agreements

Performance-based managed entry agreements (PB-MEAs) might allow patient access to new medicines, but practical hurdles make competent authorities for pricing and reimbursement (CAPR) reluctant to implement PB-MEAs. We explored if the feasibility of PB-MEAs might improve by better aligning regulatory postauthorization requirements with the data generation of PB-MEAs and by active collaboration and data sharing. Reviewers from seven CAPRs provided structured assessments of the information available at the European Medicines Agency (EMA) Web site on regulatory postauthorization requirements for fifteen recently authorized products. The reviewers judged to what extent regulatory postauthorization studies could help implement PB-MEAs by addressing uncertainty gaps. Study domains assessed were: patient population, intervention, comparators, outcomes, time horizon, anticipated data quality, and anticipated robustness of analysis. Reviewers shared general comments about PB-MEAs for each product and on cooperation with other CAPRs. Reviewers rated regulatory postauthorization requirements at least partly helpful for most products and across domains except the comparator domain. One quarter of responses indicated that public information provided by the EMA was insufficient to support the implementation of PB-MEAs. Few PB-MEAs were in place for these products, but the potential for implementation of PB-MEAs or collaboration across CAPRs was seen as more favorable. Responses helped delineate a set of conditions where PB-MEAs may help reduce uncertainty. In conclusion, PB-MEAs are not a preferred option for CAPRs, but we identified conditions where PB-MEAs might be worth considering. The complexities of implementing PB-MEAs remain a hurdle, but collaboration across silos and more transparency on postauthorization studies could help overcome some barriers