University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48109, United States
Location status: Recruiting
Location contact
Stacy Menees, MD
CONTACT
NCT Number: NCT03687814
Consecutive patients with Irritable Bowel Syndrome with Constipation (IBS-C) will be recruited from the outpatient clinics of the University of Michigan Health System. Eligible patients will be asked to participate in a study that will test the efficacy the PEG 3350 + a diet low in fermentable oligo, di, monosaccharides, and polyols (FODMAP) vs. PEG 3350 plus sham diet. Blinding dietary advice trials is challenging and therefore the sham diet was based on the criteria set forth by Staudacher et al. which emphasizes that the diet must give the impression that is the true intervention diet with similar restrictions, modifications, and time intensity without impacting the intake of essential nutrients, fiber, and FODMAPs. An example of the sham diet's carbohydrates includes: apples, bananas, and pears, and wheat. Oranges, raspberries, strawberries and rice would not be allowed. Additionally, the physicians analyzing the data will be blinded as to which group the patients were randomized.
Interested in participating?
Request Info18 year and older
All sexes
Interventional
Not applicable
Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48109, United States
Location status: Recruiting
Stacy Menees, MD
CONTACT
A. Specific Aims: While a diet low in fermentable oligo, di, monosaccharides and polyols (FODMAPs) has gained popularity as a treatment for patients with Irritable Bowel Syndrome and diarrhea (IBS-D), the impact of this diet on patients with IBS and constipation (IBS-C) is unknown. We propose a randomized, controlled trial in IBS-C patients to compare the efficacy of PEG 3350 and the low FODMAP diet to PEG 3350 and a sham diet. We hypothesize that:
We plan to test our central hypothesis and, thereby, accomplish the objective of this application by pursuing the following 2 specific aims:
Aim 1: Compare the proportion of patients with IBS-C on a diet of low FODMAP diet plus PEG 3350 vs. sham diet plus PEG 3350 reporting an improvement of abdominal pain. Our working hypothesis is that a higher proportion of patients randomized to the low FODMAP diet plus PEG 3350 will experience a reduction in the abdominal pain when compared to PEG 3350 plus sham diet alone.
Aim 2: Compare the efficacy of the low FODMAP diet plus PEG 3350 vs. sham diet plus PEG 3350 on pre-specified key clinical and disease specific quality of life endpoints in patients with IBS-C. Through our randomized controlled trial, we will assess the impact of the dietary interventions on stool consistency, stool frequency, and bloating and quality of life endpoints.
A positive result to this study would have significant impact on the treatment of patients with IBS by expanding the indications for the low FODMAP diet to all affected patients, regardless of bowel subtype. This would be particularly relevant to IBS-C patients for whom we currently have few evidence-based diet recommendations outside of increasing fiber intake.
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Subjects will follow a low FODMAP diet and will take PEG 3350 (Miralax) at 17.7 g (single dose) daily for 4 weeks.
Other names: low FODMAP diet
Subjects will follow a sham diet and will take PEG 3350 (Miralax) at 17.7 g (single dose) daily for 4 weeks.
Other names: sham diet
Time frame: during weeks 3 and 4
Compare the proportion of patients with IBS-C on a diet of low FODMAP diet plus PEG 3350 vs. sham diet plus PEG 3350 reporting an improvement of abdominal pain. It is defined 30% reduction in abdominal pain during weeks 3 & 4 of each diet compared with baseline using an 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS) (0-no pain, 11-intolerable pain). Appropriate between-group statistical comparisons will be conducted.
Time frame: each treatment week (4 weeks)
The change in mean score from baseline on the daily 11-point NRS averaged over each treatment week for bloating severity will be compared between the 2 groups.
Time frame: during weeks 3 and 4
30% reduction in abdominal discomfort during weeks 3 & 4 of each diet compared with baseline using an 11-point NRS. Appropriate between-group statistical comparisons will be conducted.
Time frame: week 4
These will be measured in the last treatment week (the 7-day period before visit 4): The proportion of responders between the 2 groups will be compared. An SBM was defined as a bowel movement that occurred without the use of rescue medication or ≥24 h after the use of rescue medication.
Time frame: last treatment week
These will be tallied in the last treatment week (the 7-day period before visit 4):(SCBMs; derived from the number of SBMs without a feeling of incomplete evacuation)
Time frame: during weeks 3 & 4
during weeks 3 & 4
Time frame: Over the 4 weeks of treatment
a responder will be defined as one who reports an increase in mean daily BSFS value of 1 or more compared to baseline for ≥2 of 4 treatment weeks. The proportion of responders between the 2 groups will be compared. Between group differences in the proportion of patients with an increase in BSFS value of ≥1
Time frame: 4 weeks
The change from baseline in daily numerical rating scale scored as 0 (none), 1 (slight), 2 (mild), 3 (moderate) and 4 (severe) scores averaged over each treatment week for straining will be compared between the 2 groups
Time frame: baseline and week 4
assess change in IBS-QOL from baseline and the last week of treatment week 4
Time frame: baseline and week 4
assess change in HADS score from baseline and the last week of treatment of week 4
Time frame: baseline and week 4
assess change in WPAI questionnaire from baseline and the last week of treatment of week 4
Time frame: baseline and week 4
assess change in Sleep Assessment questionnaire from baseline and the last week of treatment of week 4
Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.
Amy Liu, BS
CONTACT
Stacy Menees, MD, MS
CONTACT
University of Michigan
Other
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT03573908
Irritable Bowel Syndrome Characterized by Constipation
Huntsville, Alabama, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT02732743
Irritable Bowel Syndrome Characterized by Constipation
Timișoara, Timiș County, Romania
View Trial DetailsNCT02387359
Irritable Bowel Syndrome Characterized by Constipation
Athens, Alabama, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT02493452
Irritable Bowel Syndrome Characterized by Constipation
Birmingham, Alabama, United States
View Trial Details