Diagnosis and Treatment of Intestinal Malabsorption in Cystic Fibrosis James M. Littlewood, ,
Transcription
Diagnosis and Treatment of Intestinal Malabsorption in Cystic Fibrosis James M. Littlewood, ,
Pediatric Pulmonology 41:35–49 (2006) Diagnosis and Treatment of Intestinal Malabsorption in Cystic Fibrosis James M. Littlewood, MB, ChB, MD,* Susan P. Wolfe, BSc (Hons), and Steven P. Conway, MB, BS, MA Summary. Intestinal malabsorption is severe and of early onset in virtually all people who have cystic fibrosis. The main cause is deficiency of pancreatic enzymes. Bicarbonate deficiency, abnormal bile salts, mucosal transport problems, motility differences, and anatomical structural changes are other contributory factors. Effective treatment should allow a normal to high-fat diet to be taken, control symptoms, correct malabsorption, and achieve a normal nutritional state and growth. Appropriate pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy will achieve normal or near-normal absorption in most people with cystic fibrosis. Early identification and treatment of intestinal malabsorption is critical to achieving optimal nutritional status. The occurrence of fibrosing colonopathy in a few patients on very high doses of those enzymes which have the copolymer Eudragit L30 D55 in their covering resulted in guidelines in the UK to avoid doses equivalent to more than 10,000 IU lipase per kg per day, and also to avoid preparations containing this copolymer in children and adolescents. For patients not responding to 10,000 IU lipase per kg per day review of adherence to treatment, change of enzyme preparation, variation in time of administration, and reduction in gastric acid may improve absorption. The importance of early investigation to exclude other gastrointestinal disorders as a cause of the patient’s symptoms, rather than merely increasing the dose of enzymes, is stressed. With modern pancreatic enzymes in doses up to or only slightly in excess of 10,000 IU lipase per kg per day, adequate control of gastrointestinal symptoms and absorption can be achieved, and a normal nutritional state and growth rate maintained in most people with cystic fibrosis. Pediatr Pulmonol. 2006; 41:35–49. ß 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc. Key words: pancreatic enzymes; cystic fibrosis; malabsorption; nutrition. INTRODUCTION Intestinal malabsorption in cystic fibrosis (CF) is of early onset. In one series of screened infants, malabsorption affected 59% of infants by 7 weeks, 79% by 6 months, and 92% by age 1 year.1 Eventually 95% of people with CF in Northern Europe become pancreatic-insufficient (PI), i.e., they have insufficient pancreatic function to achieve normal intestinal absorption of fat, and will therefore require pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy (PERT) from an early age. However, only 85% of patients attending the Toronto CF clinic are PI; this is a reflection of the unusually high incidence of so-called ‘‘mild’’ mutations (R117H, R2334W, R347P, A455E, and P574H), which are more likely to occur in patients who are pancreatic-sufficient (PS).2 Multiple factors contribute to the intestinal malabsorption (see Table 1). Deficiency of pancreatic enzymes is the most important.3–5 The pathological changes in the pancreas of duct obstruction and destruction of acinar cells occur as a result of abnormalities of the gene product, the cystic fibrosis transmembrane regulator (CFTR). This leads to abnormal transmembrane fluid and electrolyte movement. A deficiency of pancreatic bicarbonate reduces duodenal ß 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc. pH, inactivating pancreatic enzymes and precipitating bile salts.6–8 There is increased fecal loss of bile salts9 and a relative increase in glycine-conjugated and a decrease in taurine-conjugated bile salts.10 Glycine-conjugated bile salts are less effective at lipid solubilization. Intestinal mucosal ion transport abnormalities affecting both water and electrolyte transport appear to be related to the basic CFTR defect.11 Impaired mucosal uptake and transport of long-chain fatty acids may occur.12,13 There is also altered motility, with an increased small bowel transit time.14,15 Regional Paediatric Cystic Fibrosis Unit, St. James’s University Hospital, Leeds, UK. This article is extensively reworked and updated from Paediatr Drugs 2000;2:205–222 (published by Adis International, Ltd.). *Correspondence to: James M. Littlewood, M.B., Ch.B., M.D., Regional Paediatric Cystic Fibrosis Unit, St. James’s University Hospital, Leeds LS9 7TF, UK. E-mail: jimlittlewood@btopenworld.com Received 31 March 2005; Revised 31 March 2005; Accepted 1 June 2005. DOI 10.1002/ppul.20286 Published online 15 November 2005 in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). 36 Littlewood et al. TABLE 1— Factors Contributing to Intestinal Malabsorption in Cystic Fibrosis Abnormal CFTR function in pancreatic ducts Deficiency of pancreatic enzymes Deficiency of pancreatic bicarbonate Increased fecal loss of bile salts Altered ratio of glycine- and taurine-conjugated bile salts Intestinal mucosal ion transport abnormalities Uptake and transport of long-chain fatty acids Altered motility and increased small-bowel transit time Structural abnormalities from previous surgery Structural abnormalities from previous gastrointestinal surgery for meconium ileus (e.g., shortened bowel, strictures, malrotations, and adhesions) and an excess of mucus may also be relevant.16 Although malabsorption of both fat and nitrogen is severe without PERT, carbohydrate malabsorption is minimal.17 Control of symptoms does not guarantee control of fat malabsorption.18,19 Also, persistent abdominal signs and symptoms, particularly pain, despite taking reasonable doses of enzymes, may not be due to inadequate enzyme treatment but some other cause such as constipation.20 The control of intestinal malabsorption is but one aspect of the overall nutritional management of CF, which also includes provision of an adequate energy intake, avoidance of fat-soluble vitamin deficiencies, and maintenance of an adequate energy balance by effective treatment of the respiratory infection.21–24 INVESTIGATION OF INTESTINAL MALABSORPTION It is important to document some evidence of intestinal malabsorption before starting pancreatic enzyme therapy; subsequently, the presence of pancreatic insufficiency should be confirmed, ideally by estimating fecal pancreatic elastase 1 (EL1). If clinical signs of malabsorption are mild or absent, it is advisable to confirm pancreatic insufficiency before starting enzyme therapy. There should be some regular measurement of the adequacy of PERT, as symptoms, weight gain, and growth do not always correlate with the severity of malabsorption. It is important to document evidence of pancreatic abnormality in addition to demonstrating intestinal malabsorption. Such evidence provides important support for the diagnosis of CF at all ages. Failure to demonstrate any pancreatic abnormality would cast doubt on the diagnosis of cystic fibrosis. IDENTIFICATION OF A PANCREATIC LESION Direct pancreatic stimulation tests were the traditional ‘‘gold standard’’ measurements of pancreatic function, but are not in routine use at most CF centers (see Table 2). TABLE 2— Identification of Pancreatic Lesion Direct pancreatic function tests Fecal chymotrypsin, when not taking pancreatic enzymes Immunoreactive trypsin, high or low values Fecal elastase 1, on or off enzymes Three-day fecal fat estimation The fluid volume and the bicarbonate and enzyme content of pancreatic secretions are all reduced in cystic fibrosis. Fecal chymotrypsin is unfortunately not available in the UK at present. It is reasonably stable at room temperature in contrast to the older fecal trypsin tests, and not degraded by proteolytic enzymes. Levels are low in untreated PI patients with CF, and provide useful supportive evidence of a pancreatic abnormality.25 Occasional measurements of fecal chymotrypsin are useful for monitoring PERT. Values that remain low on treatment indicate either inadequate prescription or nonadherence with treatment, although a normal value does not exclude persisting significant steatorrhea. Very high values can indicate that the dose of PERT is excessive. High values also occur if the patient has rapid intestinal transit. Conversely, constipation may be associated with low values. If low values persist alongside symptoms of malabsorption, treatments to reduce gastric-acid secretion may help improve enzyme efficacy and enable a reduction in enzyme intake. Blood immunoreactive trypsin (IRT) is raised in young infants with CF, and levels fall during childhood. Values are usually low after 10 years of age in people with CF except in those who are PS, who may remain elevated.26 In infants with CF identified by neonatal screening, the raised IRT provides additional evidence of a pancreatic lesion as well as identifying the affected infant. IRT cannot predict the onset of pancreatic insufficiency in screened PS infants. Fecal pancreatic elastase 1 is a specific human protease synthesized by the acinar cells, and is now the most suitable investigation to demonstrate a significant pancreatic lesion. It is stable, unaffected by exogenous pancreatic enzyme treatment, and correlates well with stimulated pancreatic function tests.27–29 There may be some transient mild pancreatic insufficiency associated with some reduction in EL1 levels in patients with celiac disease before treatment. This is not to the same degree as the pancreatic insufficiency associated with cystic fibrosis.30 Fecal pancreatic elastase 1 can be estimated from a very small specimen of feces. In CF, there is clear separation between PS patients who have normal values (>200 mg/g of feces) and PI patients with very low values. Fecal pancreatic elastase 1 provides evidence of pancreatic insufficiency in screened infants with CF, the test being reliable after age 2 weeks. When patients are reinvestigated as to pancreatic status, but already taking enzymes, a low EL1 will confirm the need for enzyme treatment without having to stop their treatment.31 The test is also Intestinal Malabsorption in Cystic Fibrosis useful for annual monitoring of PS patients to identify the onset of pancreatic insufficiency.32 We consider EL1 the best indirect measure of pancreatic function, and it has superseded other indirect pancreatic function tests for routine use.33 DIAGNOSIS OF INTESTINAL MALABSORPTION A number of clinical features are associated with intestinal malabsorption, although objective laboratory evidence is always required for confirmation (Table 3). Clinical signs and symptoms may be strongly suggestive of intestinal malabsorption. They are not totally reliable, and occasional patients have been started on enzymes because their symptoms were considered to be so obviously due to malabsorption, although years later they were shown to be pancreatic-sufficient. If there are abdominal distension, abdominal discomfort, and loose oily pale offensive stools (particularly if they contain orange oil), and the patient is malnourished, it is likely that there is intestinal malabsorption. However, there are patients whose symptoms and signs are caused by other gastrointestinal abnormalities.20 In such patients, demonstrating that intestinal absorption is controlled prevents a potentially harmful increase in the enzyme dose, and also prompts a search for another cause for the symptoms.34 Inadequate weight gain and growth in children and adolescents and a low BMI in adults, particularly if the appetite is good, suggest intestinal malabsorption. However, other causes should be investigated—particularly uncontrolled bronchopulmonary infection.21 Even in people with CF who are known to be PI, a poor nutritional state may be related more to ineffective control of chest infections, resulting in an increase in energy requirement and reduced appetite, rather than to uncontrolled intestinal malabsorption. The traditional method for demonstrating fat absorption is a measurement of fat excretion over a fixed time, usually a minimum of 3 days, and an estimate of dietary intake of fat over the same period.35 The fecal collection can be done at home. A dietary diary is completed by the carer/ patient and used to calculate daily fat intake by the dietitian. The intake and output of fat are then used to calculate the percentage fat absorption. Normally the equivalent of less than 5% of the fat ingested is excreted, i.e., there is over 95% absorption of dietary fat. The total daily fecal fat output is less than 7 g per day in healthy TABLE 3— Diagnosis of Fat Malabsorption Clinical symptoms and signs Measurement of weight gain and growth Fecal fat estimations Fecal microscopy for fat globules Acid steatocrit 13 C carbon mixed-triglyceride breath test 37 adults and rarely exceeds 4.9 g in adolescents, 3.1 g in children, and 4.3 g in infants.36 Unfortunately, as fecal collection is very unpleasant for patients and carers, and many laboratories are reluctant to perform the analysis, the test is largely reserved for research purposes, e.g., measuring the effect of a new enzyme preparation. People with CF are often understandably unwilling to collect fecal specimens for 3 days. Therefore, a semiquantitative estimate of fecal fat content should be made in all patients by one of the methods of fecal microscopy validated by comparison with quantitative measurements.37 These are simple, cheap techniques using microscopy of a very small amount of feces collected at home and brought to the clinic. The methods are sensitive and identify all patients with severe steatorrhea who show a great excess of neutral fat on microscopy. An alternative semiquantitative technique is a modification of the original steatocrit method, involving acidification of the fecal homogenate. Although the specimen requires centrifugation, the method is wellvalidated, and correlates well with the results of standard fecal fat estimations.38–40 Finally, the 13 carbon mixed-triglyceride breath test is a safe, noninvasive way of assessing fat digestion that can be used repeatedly.41–43 However, the test is expensive and not widely available at present. As part of their annual review, it is advised that all patients have ‘‘an assessment of the adequacy of intestinal absorption by a combination of clinical and laboratory methods.’’23,44 In summary, EL1 provides the clinician with an adequate, simple means of identifying pancreatic insufficiency at diagnosis or annually in those who remain pancreatic-sufficient. Fecal microscopy or acid steatocrit provide a semiquantitative estimate of the severity of intestinal fat absorption during pancreatic enzyme treatment. Fecal chymotrypsin gives an approximate indication of the adequacy of PERT. Ideally, timed fecal fat estimations should be available if required, and the coefficient of fat absorption should always be measured if the maintenance of adequate nutritional state and growth is proving a significant problem, or if gastrointestinal symptoms are not adequately controlled. WHO SHOULD RECEIVE PANCREATIC ENZYME REPLACEMENT THERAPY? A slender, nonthriving infant with pale oily stools should be started on enzymes after a fecal specimen has been sent for fat microscopy, chymotrypsin (if available), and EL1. Patients with obvious gastrointestinal symptoms and signs of malabsorption and evidence of a pancreatic lesion and intestinal malabsorption should receive PERT. However, where there is doubt and confusion as to the presence of pancreatic insufficiency and malabsorption, a 38 Littlewood et al. 3-day fecal fat analysis should clarify the situation. When gastrointestinal symptoms and signs are absent or minimal, it is reasonable to wait for definite evidence of malabsorption before commencing enzyme treatment. Patients who are PI will have an obvious excess of neutral and split fat on microscopy, an abnormally low fecal chymotrypsin level, a very low EL1 level, and an increased 3-day fecal fat excretion. CHOICE OF PANCREATIC ENZYME PREPARATION A classification of available types of pancreatic enzyme preparations is listed in Tables 4 and 5. The occurrence of fibrosing colonopathy (FC) in the early 1990s45 and the subsequent recommendations (see below) of the UK Committee on Safety of Medicines (CSM, 1995) and North American Consensus Committee (1995)46 will influence most clinicians in the preparation they choose for their patients. A UK case-controlled study showed both dose and preparations to be significant factors in the development of FC.47 A similar US study found only the dose of lipase to be a factor.48 The age of the patient, the clinician’s view on the importance of the copolymer Eudragit L30 D55 (in the coating of some preparations) as a factor causing FC (see below), the dose of enzyme that is required to control malabsorption, the cost, and local availability will also influence which preparation is used. In the UK, it is encouraging that there have been only four further cases of FC reported since 1994.49–52 All were taking Nutrizym GR, the only standard-strength product available in the UK that contains the copolymer Eudragit L30 D55. Despite the rarity of the complication, the occurrence and severity of the condition had a major influence on attitudes to pancreatic enzyme treatment.53,54 This subject was reviewed in detail elsewhere.55 In most specialist CF centers in the UK, enzyme preparations containing the copolymer Eudragit L30 D55 (Pancrease HL, Nutrizym 22 and 10, and Nutrizym GR) are avoided. Most infants and children now take Creon Micro, Creon 10,000, or Pancrease. A few parents preferred their children to continue with Creon 25,000, and experience with this preparation in one UK specialist CF center is reassuring.56 Most adults attending CF specialist centers in the UK are prescribed Creon 25,000, and some are prescribed Creon 40,000.57 Although opinions remain divided as to the importance of the copolymer, all are agreed that whichever preparation is used, it is important to use the minimal dose to achieve acceptable control of symptoms and intestinal malabsorption. It is disturbing that, in an audit of 17 specialist CF centers by the UK CF Database,58 many people with CF in the UK appear to be taking enzymes in doses far in excess of the CSM 1995 recommendations, which stated that ‘‘it would be prudent not to exceed a daily dose equivalent to 10,000 IU lipase/kg/day regardless of the preparation used.’’59 Since the first report of FC in 1994, more attention has been paid to regular monitoring of intestinal malabsorption in a few, but unfortunately not all, specialist CF centers and clinics. Previously in many instances, the carer or patient had largely determined the dose of enzymes according to the presence of bowel symptoms and signs. Since the description of FC, it is clear that troublesome pain or other gastrointestinal symptoms call for investigations at an early stage to determine the cause. Investigations will usually include a plain abdominal X-ray, an abdominal ultrasound, and contrast studies. The mistaken belief that recurrent abdominal pain always indicates a need for more enzymes is now less common. For infants and children, it is recommended that treatment be started with one of the standard-strength enzyme preparations, e.g., Creon or Pancrease. In 1995, the UK Committee on Safety of Medicines advised that pancreatic enzymes containing the copolymer Eudragit L30 D55 (Pancrease HL, Nutrizym 22, and Panzytrat 25,000) ‘‘will no longer be indicated for children aged TABLE 4— Pancreatic Enzyme Preparations Nonenteric coated powders. Older unprotected extracts Pancrex V, Viokase, Cotazyme powder, or (in capsules) Pancrex and Cotazyme are not indicated for routine use. In ventilated patients, they can be administered down a nasogastric tube, and omeprazole can be used in an attempt to protect their activity. Enteric coated tablets. Pancrex V (Paines & Byrne), Viokase tablets. Neither of these preparations has any place in present-day treatment. Standard-strength microsphere and minimicrosphere acid-resistant preparations. Cotazyme-S (Organon), Pancrease (Janssen-Cilag), Creon Micro, and Creon 10,000 (Solvay). Pancrease (introduced into UK in 1983; licensed 1986) and Creon (available in UK since 1985) are standard-strength preparations, and first choice for infants and all PI patients with cystic fibrosis at diagnosis. Microtablets. Pancrease HL, Nutrizym 10 and 22, Ultrase MT 6/12/20/24/30 (Eurand), Panzytrat 25,000, and Pancrease MT 4/10/16/25/32 (Nordmark). All these preparations contain copolymer Eduragit L30 D55, implicated as a factor in causation of fibrosing colonopathy. Granules. Nutrizyme GR (Eurand) granules have contained Eudragit L30 D55 since 1993. This product is still available in UK. Three infants with CF developed fibrosing colonopathy while taking this preparation. High-strength pancreatic enzymes (HSPE) (>20,000 IU lipase per capsule). In UK, Pancrease HL and Nutrizym 22 (1992), and in the USA, Pancrease MT (1993) and Ultrase MT (1992) are microtablets and contain Eudragit L30 D55. Creon 25,000 (1992) and Creon 40,000 (2002) are minimicrosphere preparations and do not contain Eudragit L30 D55. Intestinal Malabsorption in Cystic Fibrosis TABLE 5— Minimum Enzyme Content of Pancreatic Enzyme Preparations Name Enteric-coated microspheres Nutrizyme GR Pancrease Pancrecarb MS-4 Pancrecarb MS-8 Pancrecarb MS-16 Creon 20 Ultrase capsules Enterio-coated minimicrospheres Creon 5 Creon 10,000 Creon 10 Creon Micro per scoop Creon 25,000 Creon 40,000 Cotazyme-S Enteric-coated microtablets Pancrease MT4 Ultrase MT 12 Nutrizym 22 Nutrizym 10 Pancrease HL Cotazym S Pancrease MT 10 Pancrease MT 20 Ultrase MT 20 Nonenteric coated powders Pancrex V per g powder Viokase powder Manufacturer 39 1 Lipase IU Protease IU Amylase IU Merck Janssen Cilag McNeil (US) Digestive Care Digestive Care Digestive Care Solvay Axcan Scandipharm 10,000 5,000 4,500 4,000 8,000 16,000 20,000 4,500 650 330 25,000 25,000 45,000 52,000 75,000 25,000 10,000 (BP) 2,900 20,000 (USP) 20,000 (USP) 40,000 (USP) 52,000 (USP) 66,400 (USP) 20,000 (USP) Solvay Solvay Solvay Solvay Solvay Organon 5,000 10,000 10,000 5,000 25,000 40,000 10,000 18,750 600 37,000 200 1,000 1,600 750 16,600 (USP) 8,000 (Ph Eur) 33,000 (USP) 3,600 (Ph Eur) 18,000 (Ph Eur) 25,000 (Ph Eur) 7,700 (BP) McNeil Axcan Scandipharm Merck Merck Janssen Cilag Organon McNeil McNeil Axcan Scandipharm 4,000 12,000 22,000 10,000 25,000 8,000 10,000 20,000 20,000 12,000 39,000 1,100 500 1250 30,000 30,000 44,000 65,000 12,000 (USP) 39,000 (USP) 19,800 (BP) 9,000 (BP) 22,500 (BP) 30,000 (USP) 30,000 (USP) 56,000 (USP) 65,000 (USP) Paines & Byrne Axcan Scandipharm 25,000 16,800 1,400 70,000 30,000 (BP) 70,000 (USP) 1 Conversion table for units of enzyme activity (u, units). Amylase: 1 Ph Eur u ¼ 1 FIP u ¼ 1 BP u ¼ 4.15 USP u. Lipase: 1 Ph Eur u ¼ 1 FIP u ¼ 1 BP u ¼ 1 USP u. Protease: There is no direct equivalence between BP and Ph Eur units. This is because assay methods used measure protease in different ways. BP method only measures ‘‘free’’ protease, while Ph Eur method measures ‘‘bound’’ plus ‘‘free’’ protease. ‘‘Free’’ refers to active protease. ‘‘Bound’’ refers to inactive precursor for protease. When pancreatin is released from enteric-coated granules in gut, inactive ‘‘bound’’ protease precursor is rapidly converted to active ‘‘free’’ protease. Thus it could be argued that Ph Eur units are a more useful measure.129 15 years and under with cystic fibrosis, and it would be prudent not to exceed a daily dose equivalent to 10,000 IU of lipase per kg per day regardless of which preparation is used’’.59 The US Cystic Fibrosis Foundation/Food and Drugs Administration Conference of 1995 advised that ‘‘if enzyme doses of >2,500 IU lipase units per meal or 4,000 IU lipase per gm of dietary fat per day are required further investigations should be performed; larger doses should be used with caution.’’46 Also, high-strength enzyme preparations (i.e., those containing more than 20,000 IU lipase per capsule) were withdrawn from the US market. AIMS OF PANCREATIC ENZYME REPLACEMENT THERAPY Satisfactory PERT should enable the patient to eat a normal to high-fat diet and abolish unpleasant gastro- intestinal symptoms, particularly abdominal pain and distension. There should be a normal bowel habit and stool characteristics. A good nutritional state should be maintained, and in infants, children, and adolescents, growth should be normal. CONTROL OF MALABSORPTION ACHIEVED WITH PRESENT-DAY ENZYMES Considerable control of fat and protein malabsorption can be achieved in most patients: a coefficient of fat absorption of over 85% can usually be achieved, and of over 90% in many patients (normal fat absorption over 95% of fat ingested). These aims should be possible in the majority of people with CF, using present-day enzyme preparations with doses equivalent to less than or only slightly in excess of 10,000 IU lipase/kg/day (Fig. 1). In most published studies of standard-strength enzymes, a coefficient of fat absorption of between 85–95% was 40 Littlewood et al. that doses were previously unnecessarily high in some people. DIETARY FACTORS IN THE CONTROL OF MALABSORPTION Fig. 1. Daily enzyme dosages (IU lipase/kg/day) of 121 children attending the Leeds Regional Paediatric Cystic Fibrosis Centre in 1999. Each data point represents one child. Short horizontal lines indicate median dosage for each 5-year group. reported (Table 6). Studies comparing standard- and highstrength enzyme capsules in numbers delivering equivalent amounts of lipase showed similar satisfactory absorption (Table 7). Although the fat absorption achieved in the context of clinical trials is good, in practice, a substantial number of people with CF do not achieve entirely normal absorption. Factors influencing the effect of PERT include variations in the enzyme content of the capsules,60 dissolution characteristics of the preparation,60 the size of the enzyme particles and their rate of exit from the stomach,61,62 the relation of the dose to the fat intake,63 and the timing in relation to the meals.64 Even at specialist CF centers where there is a particular interest in the gastroenterological aspects of CF treatment. For example, in the Toronto CF Clinic, only one third of patients taking PERT achieved over 90% fat absorption, one third achieved over 80% absorption, and a third achieved less than 80%.65 At the Regional Paediatric CF Centre in Leeds, where 95% of the patients are PI, the mean fat absorption (þ 1 standard deviation) achieved with PERT in 0–5-, 5–10-, and 10– 15-year-olds was 89% (12.8), 91% (4.5), and 83% (10.1) of intake, respectively. In 1999, the mean doses of enzymes used in Leeds for the 0–5-, 5–10-, 10–15-, and over 15-year-old groups were 8,038, 6,832, 6,847, and 5,186 IU lipase per kg per day (Fig. 1), respectively. Nitrogen absorption is usually adequately controlled on enzymes.66,67 Carbohydrate malabsorption is minimal.17 In specialist CF centers where fat absorption is not monitored regularly, even by semiquantitative methods, it is likely that a considerable number of patients will be taking unnecessarily high doses of enzymes.58 Following the description of excessive PERT as a cause of FC, dose reduction without deterioration in intestinal absorption was reported,63,68 supporting the impression The majority of people with CF treated with presently available acid-resistant enzymes can tolerate a normal or high-fat diet. The traditional low-fat diet is rarely required. It is important that enzyme treatment is matched to the approximate quantity of fat in each particular meal and snack. This has received more attention following the need to reduce enzyme doses, and is an aspect of treatment where the dietitian’s expertise and guidance are essential. It was suggested that the usual diet recommended for people with CF is too low in fiber, and that increasing the fiber intake will reduce any persisting abdominal symptoms,69 although this was not the experience of others.70 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PANCREATIC ENZYME REPLACEMENT THERAPY Since the reports of FC, as part of the present-day approach to the use of pancreatic enzymes, various guidelines and reports of consensus groups have appeared.46,59,71,72 For infants, it is suggested that minimicrospheres or microsphere preparations be used (Creon Micro, Creon 10,000, or Pancrease). For every 120 ml of infant formula or breast milk, an initial dose of half a scoop of Creon Micro (2,500 IU Lipase) or one quarter to one third of a capsule of Creon 10,000 (2,500–3,333 IU lipase) or one third to one half a capsule Pancrease (1,666–2,500 IU lipase) be given. These doses equate to approximately 400–800 IU lipase per gram of dietary fat. The micro/minimicrospheres are mixed with a small amount of formula, expressed breast milk, or fruit puree, and given from a spoon. Ideally the dose should be divided between the beginning, middle, and end of the feed. The timing of administration can be adjusted according to the infant’s symptoms and signs. The dose is gradually increased according to clinical symptoms and signs, e.g., the appearance and frequency of stools, and objective assessment of weight gain, growth, and fat absorption. Once solid food is introduced, the enzyme dose is individually titrated according to the fat intake. Regular advice from a dietitian is mandatory to achieve the best results. The aim is to keep the lipase intake below 10,000 IU per kg body weight per day. For older children and adults, the suggested initial dose is 2–4 scoops of Creon Micro (10,000–20,00 IU lipase), 1–2 capsules of Creon 10,000 (10,000–20,000 IU lipase) or Pancrease (5,000–10,000 IU lipase) per meal, and 1–2 scoops of Creon Micro or a half to one capsule of Creon Children 12.8 9 (5) 8 (4) 27 21 (13) 34 (19) 54 (51) 36 (34) 38 (36) Brady et al., 1991116 Brady et al., 199264 Elliott et al., 1992117 Beker et al., 1994118 Sinaasappel et al., 1998119 Patchell et al., 2002120 Stern et al., 2000121 Konstan et al., 2004122 Adults 24.4 21 (10) George et al., 1990115 8–36 years 7–36 years 26 (22) 31 (25) 10 (3–17) 12.2 (3–30) (3–27) (5–18) 8.8 (8–15) (7–10) 8.9 (3–27) Adults 23 12 (6–20) (10–16) Stead et al., 1987114 10 (10) Age (yrs) (range) 19 (19), but 6 patients unable to tolerate Pancrex V 66 Number (finished) Beverley et al., 198767 Mischler et al., 1982 Authors and year Placebo Creon 20 Placebo Creon 20 Placebo Ultrase MT 20 Placebo Ultrase MT 20 Pancrex forte (5.6) Pancreatin Merck (7.7) Pancrex V Forte Creon (8) Pancrease (4) Creon (8) Pancrease (4) Pancrease (4) Pancrease (4) Pancrease (4) Pancrease (4) Creon (8) Pancrease MT 4, 12, 16 Pancrease MT 4, 12, 16 Creon 8 (8) microsphere Creon 10 minimicrosphere (10) Creon microspheres (8) Creon minimicrosphere (10) Creon (8) Placebo Cotazym Pancrease Pancrease (5) Brand (1000 I.U. lipase) TABLE 6— Selected Trials of ‘‘Standard’’ Pancreatic Enzyme Preparations Usual To deliver similar lipase dose Dose required to achieve 80% fat absorption Nil 4,538 I.U. lipase/kg/day Nil 7,856 I.U. lipase/kg/day Nil Not >2,500 I.U. lipase/kg/meal Nil Not >2,500 I.U. lipase/kg/meal 27.6/day 19/day 13/day (10–29) 9/day (7–18) 10/day 42/day 22/day premeals 22/day with meals 25/day 15/day 500 IU lipase/kg/meal 1,500 IU lipase/kg/ml Doses to deliver similar lipase Dose to deliver same lipase as in Pancrease 18/day (6–40) Nil Both 2/meal and l/snack Dose (caps/day) 50.9 7.3 87.2 1.7 52.15 5.6 84.1 2.2 46 35.8 79.4 12.5 58.7 16.5 87.3 10.2 74 (52–93) 81 (34–94) 70.6 83.4 81 2.7 81 3.1 86 (69–96) 91.3 (79–98.6) 92.7 1.4 91.6 1.4 89 (85–93) 90 (86–94) 86.2 (31–99) 91.2 (71–100) 85.7 83.2 93.5 91.3 85 (56–94) 45 29.6 73.7 15.4 84.1 6.9 87 (24–95) % fat absorbed ‘‘Clearly establish safety and efficacy of Ultrase MT’’ 6.7 g/24 hr 8.4 g/24 hr (47/51 preferred Creon 10,000) 6.2 g 7.2 g 27.7 g 15.2 g 22.4 3.4 g 24.4 g 4.7 g 67.9 1.3 29.9 22.2 17.3 9.3 Fecal fat g/24 hr Intestinal Malabsorption in Cystic Fibrosis 41 84 83 85 55.6 76 (9–92) 91 (57–97) 96.1 (91–99.4) 95.8 (82–99.6) Equivalent control of symptoms 90 (81–97) 90 (82–97) <12 usual dose 2–8 on age Nil 30 (15–100) 15 (8–80) 24 8 ‘‘Usual dose’’ ‘‘Usual dose’’ 1 1 2 to 3 (55%) of usual dose 20 (12–30) 9 (6–11) All improved when changed from Creon 25,000 to equivalent dose of Creon 40,000 Creon (8) Pancrease HL (25) Panzytrat 25,000 (25) Placebo Nutrizym GR (10) Nutrizym 22 (22) Creon (8) Creon 25,000 (25) Creon (8) Pancrease (5) Creon 25,000 (25) Cotazym S Forte (10) Creon Forte (25) Creon 40,000 8.7 3.4 Adults 14 (14) 9 (no adverse reactions) Hartley et al., 200457 7.1 45 (44) Robinson and Natoll 1988128 12.8 (6–21) 33 (31) Taylor et al., 1996127 11.5 (4.9–14.1) 21 (18) Friesen and Prestige, 1995126 12 15 (8) Chazalette, 1993124 Bowler et al., 1993125 8 (1.25–27) 38 (27) Morrison et al., 1992 Authors 2nd year 123 Age in years (range) Number (finished) 1 3 % fat absorbed Dose caps/day Brand (1000 I.U. lipase) Fecal fat g/day 26.1 (7.5–57.7) 8.7 (2.2–52.8) 3.1 (0.3–9.7) 3.4 (0.3–3.40) Littlewood et al. TABLE 7— Selected Trials of ‘‘High-Strength’’ Pancreatic Enzyme Preparations 42 10,000 or Pancrease with fat-containing snacks. Newly diagnosed adult patients may be given Creon 25,000 at a starting dose of 1–2 capsules per meal and 1 capsule per fat-containing snack. Enzymes should be given with all fat-containing foods. The dose should be worked out individually, with the help of a dietitian, and varied according to fat intake. Because of multiple factors affecting enzyme efficacy, dose requirements can vary widely between 500–4,000 IU lipase per gram of fat. The capsules should be swallowed whole as early as possible; many will manage this by 3 or 4 years of age. If removed from the capsules, the microspheres should not be sprinkled on or mixed with the whole meal, but should be mixed with a little fluid or food and immediately given from a spoon in one swallow. They should not be crushed or chewed in the mouth. The dose is gradually increased until the symptoms are controlled. Evidence is then sought that fat absorption has been controlled, either by fecal fat microscopy or acid steatocrit, or by measuring the 3-day fecal fat output. Patients and parents should be encouraged to openly discuss any problems with enzyme adherence that they may have. Advice should be given to help overcome these relatively common problems. USE OF PANCREATIC ENZYMES IN PATIENTS RECEIVING ENTERAL FEEDS Pancreatic enzymes should be taken with all fatcontaining enteral feeds, whether elemental or polymeric. The dose is worked out on an individual basis, taking the fat content and rate of administration of the feed into consideration. It is usual practice to administer enzymes either at the beginning of the feed and before going to bed,73 or at the beginning and end of the feed.74 If the infusion is over a long period, it was observed that only small doses of enzyme are required, e.g., 2 Creon 10,000 at the beginning and end of the feed. This may be related to the presence of gastric lipase activity.75 PANCREATIC ENZYME THERAPY IN THE VENTILATED PATIENT Enteric-coated enzymes cannot be put down standard nasogastric and gastrostomy tubes. If the patient is unconscious and is unable to take enzymes orally, it is possible to give a powdered enzyme preparation, e.g., Pancrex V. These enzymes (approximately 0.5 g) should be mixed with fluid and flushed down the tube with each bolus feed, or every 3–4 hr if the patient is fed continuously. The enzymatic activity of powdered enzymes is largely destroyed in the acid environment of the stomach. Therefore, an acid-blocking agent (e.g., Intestinal Malabsorption in Cystic Fibrosis omeprazole) should be given to try to preserve some of the enzymatic activity. LONG-TERM MONITORING OF SYMPTOMS, SIGNS, NUTRITION, GROWTH, AND ABSORPTION At all clinic visits and the annual review, it is important to ensure that the goals of nutritional therapy are being achieved, i.e., are weight, height, and growth rate normal? ASSESSING DEGREE OF CONTROL OF MALABSORPTION The patient should tolerate a normal to high-fat diet without abdominal pain, distension, or abnormal or excessively frequent fatty stools. In some children with well-controlled absorption and little or no chest infection, a normal energy intake may be adequate to achieve good weight gain and growth. However, if the nutritional state and/or growth are abnormal, the diet should provide in excess of 120% of the energy recommended for age. In such patients, a full dietary assessment is indicated by a dietitian experienced in cystic fibrosis. High-energy dietary supplements or even enteral feeding may be required for some. Weight should be recorded at every clinic visit, and in children, height should also be recorded. In adults, height should be recorded at every clinic visit until growth has ceased, and then it should be recorded annually. The head circumference of infants should be measured periodically. Weight and height should be plotted on a growth chart appropriate for the local population. After age 10 years, the stage of puberty should be noted, as the stage of development affects the rate of growth, both being influenced by the nutritional state. At the annual review, measurements should also be converted to standard deviation scores (Z scores) or percent weight for height, percent weight for age, percent height for age, and body mass index (BMI), to allow for greater accuracy in the determination of nutritional status and changes over time.22,23 It is important that, for children, BMI is plotted on the appropriate centile charts or converted to Z scores for the data to be meaningful.76 Fecal chymotrypsin values should be normal. Coefficients of fat absorption of between 85–95% of intake should be achievable in most patients with presently available enzyme preparations. In patients whose absorption has been a problem or who have abdominal symptoms, a formal measurement of fat absorption is advisable. In others, fecal fat microscopy should show 43 TABLE 8— Assessing Degree of Control of Malabsorption Gastrointestinal symptoms and signs Dietary and enzyme assessment by dietitian experienced in CF Measurement and assessment of nutritional state and growth Fecal chymotrypsin Fecal fat output Fecal microscopy for fat or steatocrit Plasma fat-soluble vitamins A, D, and E Serum albumin (or prealbumin) little or no neutral fat and only þ or þþ split fat in 2 or 3 small, randomly collected fecal specimens.37 A repeated excess of neutral fat suggests significant maldigestion and malabsorption. Normal plasma levels of fat-soluble vitamins A, D, and E should be achieved in the majority of patients receiving regular vitamin supplements of vitamin A 4,000–10,000 IU, vitamin D 400–2,000 IU, and vitamin E 50–200 mg daily. Albumin levels are usually normal and low values are very unusual, except in people with CF who have significant liver disease. Low albumin levels should prompt further investigation. FAILURE TO CONTROL GASTROINTESTINAL SYMPTOMS If control of symptoms is not achieved with a dose of enzyme equivalent to 10,000 IU lipase per kg per day given in an appropriate manner, some estimation of the degree of residual malabsorption is mandatory. Also, it is important to consider other gastrointestinal disorders as a cause of persisting gastrointestinal symptoms, as the symptoms may not be due to fat malabsorption. It is likely that the larger doses of enzymes that UK patients are continuing to take are due to their dose being determined by symptoms and not by firm evidence of persisting fat malabsorption.58 Doses slightly in excess of 10,000 IU lipase per kg per day are used in some CF centers, including our own, for a minority of patients, but only after investigations have demonstrated the presence and severity of persisting intestinal malabsorption (Fig. 1). These patients usually have very high fat intakes. Persisting and recurrent abdominal symptoms in patients on PERT whose malabsorption is adequately controlled (coefficient of fat absorption >85%) (Table 10), require further investigation. The whole range of causes of recurrent abdominal pain and other gastrointestinal symptoms was reported in people with CF (Table 9), and these were reviewed extensively elsewhere.20,34 Distal intestinal obstruction syndrome (DIOS) is characterized by recurrent attacks of abdominal pain with 44 Littlewood et al. TABLE 9— Other Causes of Abdominal Pain Distal intestinal obstruction syndrome Chronic constipation and acquired megacolon Gastrointestinal reflux Cows’ milk intolerance Inflammatory bowel disease Pancreatitis Helicobacter pylori infection Celiac disease Liver and gall bladder disease Intolerance to porcine enzyme preparations variable symptoms of obstruction, and is relatively common in people with cystic fibrosis.77 Inadequate PERT was suggested as a contributory factor in some patients.78 However, in some people, DIOS may result from excessive enzyme intakes, and it is important that PERT is not progressively increased unless significant fat malabsorption is confirmed by fecal fat studies. An increase in enzyme dose in patients with abdominal pain, whose symptoms are due to constipation, may worsen their symptoms. In these patients, treatment to clear the bowel contents may be more appropriate, followed by a period of laxative therapy.79,80 A plain abdominal x-ray is invaluable in identifying the frequent gross fecal overloading of the colon, which may not be detected from the history or by abdominal palpation (Fig. 2).20 Pancreatic enzyme therapy should be reviewed, and treatment with laxatives may be indicated. Inconsistent or excessive enzyme-dosing may cause chronic constipation. Gastro-esophageal reflux seems particularly common in both infants81,82 and older patients,83 and may cause significant upper abdominal or lower chest pain not obviously of esophageal origin. Other conditions that may cause confusion include cows’ milk intolerance,84 inflammatory bowel disease,85,86 pancreatitis87–89 (in PS patients), Helicobacter pylori infection,90 celiac disease,30,91 liver and gall bladder disease,92 and intolerance of porcine enzyme preparations.93 TABLE 10— Inadequate Control on 10,000 IU Lipase Per kg Equivalent Per Day Review enzyme dose, method, and timing of enzyme intake Confirm there is persisting malabsorption by fecal fat output, microscopy, or steatocrit Review by experienced dietitian, particularly considering patient adherence Endeavor to tailor enzyme dose more closely to dietary fat intake Check expiration date on enzyme packet Changing to different enzyme preparation Reduction in gastric acid by adding proton pump inhibitor, e.g., omeprazole Addition of taurine supplements Fig. 2. Chronic constipation and acquired megacolon are common findings when investigating chronic abdominal pain in people with CF who may not complain of constipation or any disturbance in bowel habits. Overloaded colon is outlined. Persisting abdominal symptoms in patients on PERT in doses equivalent 10,000 IU lipase per kg per day whose malabsorption is not adequately controlled (coefficient of fat absorption <85%), requires consideration of patient adherance. Consideration of the patient’s adherence to the dose and method of taking enzymes is important, as poor adherence is a common problem. Schoolchildren and adolescents may be reluctant to take enzymes when with their friends or at school. Persistently low fecal chymotrypsin suggests that poor adherence may be an important factor in the poor control of malabsorption. Failure to take other treatments will also make nonadherence a likely cause for the persisting malabsorption, e.g., a low plasma vitamin E level despite apparently taking an adequate supplemental dose of the vitamin. The importance of the role of an experienced dietitian to discuss the practical details of treatment in such circumstances cannot be overemphasized. Adjusting the enzyme intake to match the fat content of the foods eaten can make a major contribution to improving the degree of fat absorption. A refinement of this is to adjust the enzyme intake to each gram of fat.94 Intestinal Malabsorption in Cystic Fibrosis Matching the enzyme dose to the fat content of a meal has enabled significant reduction in dose to be made without compromising nutrition or growth.68 Consideration should be given to changing to another brand of enzyme that, in the same dose, may result in a quite dramatic improvement in symptoms and absorption. Presumably the many differences in pharmacological characteristics may be relevant to their differing performance in practice, including their quantitative and qualitative enzyme content,95 dissolution characteristics,60 and size of the particles.61,62 The individual differences in dose requirements, even in patients with little or no residual pancreatic function, are presumably due, in part, to these brand differences. The variable mixing of enzymes with the meal in the stomach and rate of leaving the stomach suggest that a trial of varying the timing of taking the enzymes through the meal may improve absorption in individual patients, e.g., give more at the start or more near the end, or give regularly during the meal. Dividing the dose will also reduce the chance of overdosing if the meal is refused halfway through. Reduction of gastric acid as a means of improving enzyme function was the subject of considerable research before the introduction of acid-resistant preparations in the early 1980s,96–100 but interest waned as more effective enzymes became generally available. However, the report of FC in 1994,45 and the subsequent recommendation not to exceed the equivalent of 10,000 IU lipase per kg per day, renewed interest in acid suppression for the minority of patients who require more than this dose. Sodium bicarbonate is being revisited in an effort to reduce duodenal acidity and improve enzyme function. Although combining sodium bicarbonate with an acid-resistant enzyme (Pancrecarb) does not appear to improve absorption,101 the addition of sodium bicarbonate (5.2 g/m2 surface area) improved fat absorption in patients whose control was poor.97 In present-day practice, additional bicarbonate is rarely used, as it represents yet another medication to take before every meal, and there are more effective means of reducing gastric acid. Acid suppression using a variety of agents to reduce gastric acid has improved absorption in some of those patients where control was poor even with acid-resistant enzymes. A recent Cochrane review concluded there was limited evidence that agents that reduce gastric acidity in people with CF are associated with improvement in gastrointestinal symptoms and fat absorption, and there was insufficient evidence to indicate whether they improved nutritional status or lung function.102 Treatments have included cimetidine, both with conventional enzymes96,99,100 and with enteric-coated, acid-resistant microspheres.98 Ranitidine 4 mg/kg/day in two divided doses, maximum 300 mg b.d.,103 omeprazole 20 mg daily in adults and 0.7–1.4 mg/kg/day in children,104,105 and 45 lansoprazole 15 mg daily will improve absorption in many patients whose absorption is poorly controlled on 10,000 IU lipase per kg doses of enzymes.106 Finally, taurine-conjugated bile acids are in relatively short supply due to the gastrointestinal losses that occur in CF and the relatively greater compensatory production of glycine-conjugated bile acids.9 In CF, taurine-conjugated bile acids are deficient in plasma and bile.10 There is some evidence that oral taurine (30 mg/kg/day) will correct the deficiency and improve malabsorption.107 SIDE EFFECTS OF PANCREATIC ENZYMES Fibrosing colonopathy is the most serious side effect, and was reviewed elsewhere (see Table 11).53,55,59 Hyperuricemia and hyperuricosuria, which occurred with the older, less pure pancreatic extracts,108 are no longer a problem with modern microsphere preparations.109 Soreness of the mouth may occur with powdered preparations or if acid-resistant microspheres are crunched or held in the mouth and dissolved with a pH of greater than 5.5. Perianal irritation may result from the passage of significant proteolytic enzyme activity in the stools if intestinal transit is rapid or the enzyme dose excessive, with the latter also being suggested by a high fecal chymotrypsin level. Immune reactions related to the porcine origin of pancreatic enzymes usually cause an insignificant immunological response in most patients,110 although this was suggested as a possible etiological factor in fibrosing colonopathy.111 However, severe acute and chronic gastrointestinal allergic reactions may occur and should be considered when control of symptoms proves difficult.93 General allergic reactions may occur in people administering powdered enzymes.112,113 In patients who have had chronic uncontrolled severe fat malabsorption, a too rapid increase in enzyme dose may cause severe constipation and abdominal pain, which presents similar problems to distal intestinal obstruction syndrome. CONCLUSIONS The aims and practical details of management of malabsorption in people with cystic fibrosis have been reviewed in the light of the recent developments and recommendations. This is timely, as many people with CF TABLE 11— Side Effects of Pancreatic Enzymes Fibrosing colonopathy Hyperuricemia and hyperuricosuria Soreness of mouth Perianal irritation Immune reactions Abdominal pain and constipation Distal intestinal obstruction 46 Littlewood et al. in the UK are still taking more PERT than is necessary58 and considerably more than recommended by the Committee on Safety of Medicines.59 The fine details of enzyme administration and the need to avoid excessive doses are important, as is the need to identify other correctable causes of persisting abdominal symptoms. It is particularly important to investigate people with CF who have chronic abdominal symptoms rather than always attributing their symptoms to CF and merely increasing the dose of enzymes. Fibrosing colonopathy was undoubtedly a new condition which developed in a few people with CF within 6–24 months of starting certain high-strength enzyme preparations. Although opinions are clearly divided as to whether the copolymer covering is an important contributory cause, all are agreed that the very high doses of pancreatic enzymes achieved were an important factor in the pathogenesis of the condition. It is important that regular gastrointestinal surveillance of all patients taking PERT should be routine practice in specialist CF centers and CF clinics. Clinicians must convince laboratories of the importance of fecal fat estimations in certain patients and of routine monitoring of fecal fat by semiquantitative methods, such as fecal microscopy, in all patients. Also, patients and their families should be persuaded of the importance of collecting occasional small fecal specimens for analysis by microscopy. Using the pancreatic enzyme preparations available at present, it should be possible to achieve control of abdominal symptoms, near-normal intestinal absorption, and normal nutrition and growth in the majority of people who have cystic fibrosis. REFERENCES 1. Bronstein MN, Sokol RJ, Abman SH, Chatfield BA, Hammond KB, Hambidge KM. Pancreatic insufficiency, growth, and nutrition in infants identified by newborn screening as having cystic fibrosis. J Pediatr 1992;120:533–540. 2. Kristidis P, Bozon D, Corey M, Markiewicz D, Rommens J, Tsui LC. Genetic determination of exocrine pancreatic function in cystic fibrosis. Am J Hum Genet 1992;50:1178–1184. 3. Zentler-Munro PL, Fitzpatrick WJ, Batten JC, Northfield TC. Effect of intraduodenal acidity on aqueous phase bile acid and lipid concentrations in pancreatic steatorrhoea due to cystic fibrosis. Gut 1984;25:500–507. 4. Zentler-Munro PL. Pancreatic exocrine insufficiency and cystic fibrosis. Curr Opin Gastroenterol 1989;5:706–710. 5. Durie PR, Forstner GG. Pathophysiology of the exocrine pancreas in cystic fibrosis. J R Soc Med [Suppl 16] 1989;82: 2–10. 6. Gilbert J, Kelleher J, Littlewood JM, Evans DF. Ileal pH in cystic fibrosis. Scand J Gastroenterol [Suppl 143] 1988;23:132– 134. 7. Robinson PJ, Smith AL, Sly PD. Duodenal pH in cystic fibrosis and its relationship to fat malabsorption. Dig Dis Sci 1990;35: 1299–1304. 8. Geus WP, Gan KH, Lamers CBHW, Heijerman HGM. Simultaneously measured duodenal and gastric pH in patients with cystic fibrosis: effect of omeprazole. Neth J Med [Suppl] 1999;54:63. 9. Walters MP, Littlewood JM. Fecal bile acid and dietary residue excretion in cystic fibrosis: age group variations. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 1998;27:296–300. 10. Roy CC, Weber AM, Morin CL, Combes JC, Nussle D, Megevand A, et al. Abnormal biliary composition in cystic fibrosis. Effect of pancreatic enzymes. N Engl J Med 1977;297: 1301–1305. 11. Sinaasappel M. Relationship between intestinal function and chloride secretion in patients with cystic fibrosis. Neth J Med 1992;41:110–114. 12. Kalivianakis M, Minich DM, Bijleveld CMA, van Aalderen WM, Stellaard F, Laseur M. Fat malabsorption in cystic fibrosis patients receiving enzyme replacement therapy is due to impaired intestinal uptake of long chain fatty acids. Am J Clin Nutr 1999;69:127–134. 13. Laiho KM, Gavin J, Murphy JL, Connett GJ, Stephen SA, Wootton S. Maldigestion and malabsorption of 13 C labelled tripalmitin in gastrostomy-fed patients with cystic fibrosis. Clin Nutr 2004;23:347–353. 14. Dalzell AM, Freestone NS, Billington D, Heaf DP. Small intestinal permeability and oro-caecal transit time in cystic fibrosis. Arch Dis Child 1990;65:585–588. 15. Seal S, McClean P, Walters M, Wolfe SP, Harding M, Coward W, et al. Stable isotope studies of pancreatic enzyme release in vivo. Postgrad Med J [Suppl] 1996;72:37–38. 16. Oppenheimer EH, Esterly JR. Pathology of cystic fibrosis. Review of the literature and comparison with 146 autopsied cases. Perspect Pediatr Pathol 1975;2:241–278. 17. Hoffman RD, Isenberg JN, Powell GK. Carbohydrate malabsorption is normal in school age cystic fibrosis children. Dig Dis Sci 1987;32:1071–1074. 18. Murphy JL, Wootton SA, Bond SA, Jackson AA. Energy content of stools in normal healthy controls and patients with cystic fibrosis. Arch Dis Child 1991;66:495–500. 19. Littlewood JM. Value of comprehensive assessment and investigation in the management of cystic fibrosis. In: Escobar H, Basquero L, Suarez L, editors. Clinical ecology of cystic fibrosis. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 1993. pp 181–187. 20. Littlewood JM. Abdominal pain in cystic fibrosis. J R Soc Med 1995;88:7–15. 21. Littlewood JM, Wolfe SP. Nutrition in cystic fibrosis. In: Heatley RV, Green JH, Losowsky MS, editors. Consensus in clinical nutrition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1994. pp 388–419. 22. Littlewood JM, Wolfe SP. Control of malabsorption in cystic fibrosis. Paediatr Drugs 2000;2:205–222. 23. Nutritional management of cystic fibrosis. Report of the UK Cystic Fibrosis Trust Nutrition Working Group. Cystic Fibrosis Trust; London 2002. 24. Sinaasappel M, Stern M, Littlewood J, Wolfe SP, Steinkamp G, Heijerman HGH, et al. Nutrition in patients with cystic fibrosis: a European consensus. J Cystic Fibrosis 2002;1: 51–75. 25. Brown GA, Sule D, Williams J, Puntis JWL, Booth IW, McNeish AS. Faecal chymotrypsin: a reliable index of exocrine pancreatic function. Arch Dis Child 1988;63:785–789. 26. Brown RC, Chalmers DM, Rowe VL, Kelleher J, Littlewood JM, Losowsky MS. Comparison of the diagnostic value of serum pancreatic isoamylase and immunoreactive trypsin measurement in patients with cystic fibrosis. J Clin Pathol 1982;35: 547–549. Intestinal Malabsorption in Cystic Fibrosis 27. Soldan W, Henker J, Sprossig C. Sensitivity and specificity of quantitative determination of pancreatic elastase 1 in feces of children. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 1997;24:53–55. 28. Gullo L, Graziano L, Babbini S, Ballistini A, Lazzari R, Pezzilli R. Faecal elastase 1 in children with cystic fibrosis. Eur J Pediatr 1997;156:770–772. 29. Cade A, Walters MP, McGinley M, Firth J, Brownlee KG, Conway SP, et al. Evaluation of fecal elastase-1 as a measure of pancreatic exocrine function in children with cystic fibrosis. Pediatr Pulmonol 2000;29:172–176. 30. Carroccio A, Iacono G, Ippolito S, Verghi F, Cavataio F, Soresi M, et al. Usefulness of faecal elastase-1 assay in monitoring pancreatic function in childhood coeliac disease. Dig Liver Dis 1998;30:500–504. 31. Borowitz D, Baker SS, Duffy L, Baker RD, Fitzpatrick L, Gyamfi J, et al. Use of fecal elastase-1 to classify pancreatic status in patients with cystic fibrosis. J Pediatr 2004;145:322– 326. 32. Walkowiak J, Nousia-Arvanitakis S, Agguridaki C, Fotoulaki M, Strzykala K, Balassopoulou A, et al. Longitudinal follow-up of exocrine pancreatic function in pancreatic sufficient cystic fibrosis patients using the fecal elastase-1 test. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2003;36:474–478. 33. Beharry S, Ellis L, Corey M, Marcon M, Durie P. How useful is fecal pancreatic elastase 1 as a marker of exocrine pancreatic disease? J Pediatr 2002;141:84–90. 34. Littlewood JM. Gastrointestinal complications in cystic fibrosis. J R Soc Med [Suppl] 1992;85:13–19. 35. van de Kamer JH, ten Bokkel Huinink H, Weyers HA. Rapid method for the determination of fat in faeces. J Biol Chem 1949;177:347–355. 36. Schmerling DH, Forrer JCW, Prader A. Faecal fat and nitrogen in healthy children and in children with malabsorption and maldigestion. Pediatrics 1970;46:690–695. 37. Walters MP, Kelleher J, Gilbert J, Littlewood JM. Clinical monitoring of steatorrhoea in cystic fibrosis. Arch Dis Child 1990;63:99–102. 38. Tran M, Forget P, van der Neucker A, Strik J, van Kreel B, Kuitjen R. The acid steatocrit: a much improved method. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 1994;19:299–303. 39. van den Neucker A, Pestel A, Tran TM, Forget PP, Veeze HJ, Bouquet J, et al. Clinical use of acid steatocrit. Acta Paediatr Scand 1997;86:466–469. 40. Wagner MH, Bowser VK, Sherman JM, Frachisco MP, Theriaqued D, Novak DA. Comparison of steatocrit and fat absorption in persons with cystic fibrosis. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2002;35:202–205. 41. Amarri S, Harding M, Coward WA, Evans TJ, Weaver LT. 13 carbon mixed triglyceride breath test and pancreatic supplementation in cystic fibrosis. Arch Dis Child 1997;76:349–351. 42. Ritz MA, Fraser RJ, Di Mattteo AC, Greville H, Butler R, Cmielewski P, et al. Evaluation of the 13C-triolein breath tests for fat malabsorption in adult patients with cystic fibrosis. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2004;19:448–453. 43. Swart GR, Sinaasappel M, Hoekstra JH, Houwen RHJ, van der Laag J, Gijsbers CFM, et al. Fecal fat balance and the 13C mixed triglyceride breath test: diagnostic precision as determined in repeated studies in patients with cystic fibrosis. Pediatr Pulmonol [Suppl] 1998;17:363. 44. Standards for the clinical care of children and adults with cystic fibrosis in the UK. UK Cystic Fibrosis Trust Clinical Standards and Accreditation Group. Cystic Fibrosis Trust; London 2001. 45. Smyth RL, van Velzen D, Smyth AR, Lloyd DA, Heaf DP. Strictures of the ascending colon in cystic fibrosis and high strength pancreatic enzymes. Lancet 1994;343:85–86. 47 46. Borowitz DS, Grand RJ, Durie PR. Use of pancreatic enzyme supplements for patients with cystic fibrosis in the context of fibrosing colonopathy. Consensus Committee. J Pediatr 1995; 127:681–684. 47. Smyth RL, Ashby D, O’Hea U, Burrows E, Lewis P, van Velzen D, et al. Fibrosing colonopathy in cystic fibrosis: results of a case-controlled study. Lancet 1995;346:1247–1251. 48. FitzSimmons SC, Burkhart GA, Borowitz D, Grand RJ, Hammerstrom T, Durie PR. High dose pancreatic enzyme supplements and fibrosing colonopathy in children with cystic fibrosis. N Engl J Med 1997;336:1283–1289. 49. Jones R, Franklin K, Spicer R, Berry J. Colonic strictures in children with cystic fibrosis on low strength pancreatic enzymes. Lancet 1995;346:1230. 50. Ramsden WH, Littlewood JM, Moya EF. Colonic wall thickness, pancreatic enzyme dose and type of preparation in cystic fibrosis. Arch Dis Child 1998;79:339–343. 51. Bakowski MT, Prescott P. Patterns of use of pancreatic enzyme supplements in fibrosing colonopathy: implications for pathogenesis. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 1997;6:347–358. 52. Prescott P, Bakowski MT. Pathogenesis of fibrosing colonopathy: the role of methacrylic acid copolymer. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 1999;8:377–384. 53. Littlewood JM. Implications of the Committee on Safety of Medicines 10,000 IU lipase/kg/day recommendation for use of pancreatic enzymes in cystic fibrosis. Arch Dis Child 1996;74: 466–468. 54. Littlewood JM. Management of malabsorption in cystic fibrosis: influence of recent developments on clinical practice. Postgrad Med J [Suppl] 1996;72:56–62. 55. Littlewood JM. Update on intestinal strictures. J R Soc Med [Suppl] 1999;92:41–49. 56. Connett GJ, Lucas JS, Atchley JTM, Fairhurst JJ, Rolles CJ. Colonic wall thickening is related to age and not dose of high strength pancreatic microspheres in children with cystic fibrosis. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 1999;11:181–183. 57. Hartley R, Watson H, Haworth CS, Bilton D. Selective use of Creon 40,000 in a specialist adult CF unit. J Cystic Fibrosis 2004;3:71. 58. Mehta A. Further comments on fibrosing colonopathy study. Lancet 2001;358:1547–1548. 59. Report of the Pancreatic Enzymes Working Party, Medicine Control Agency, Committee on Safety of Medicines, May 1995. 60. Walters MP, Littlewood JM. Pancreatin preparations used in the treatment of cystic fibrosis—lipase content and in vitro release. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 1996;10:433–440. 61. Meyer JH, Porter-Fink V, Elashoff J, Dressman J, Amidon GL. Human postcibal gastric emptying of 1–3 millimetre spheres. Gastroenterology 1988;94:1315–1325. 62. Taylor CJ, Hillel PG, Ghosal S, Frier M, Senior S, Tindale WB, et al. Gastric emptying and intestinal transit of pancreatic enzyme supplements in cystic fibrosis. Arch Dis Child 1999;80: 149–152. 63. Beckles-Willson N, Taylor CJ, Ghosal S, Pickering M. Reducing pancreatic enzyme dose does not compromise growth in cystic fibrosis. J Hum Nutr Diet 1998;11:487–492. 64. Brady MS, Rickard K, Yu PL, Eigen H. Effectiveness of enteric coated pancreatic enzymes given before meals in reducing steatorrhea in children with cystic fibrosis. J Am Diet Assoc 1992;92:813–817. 65. Durie PR, Kalnins D, Ellis L. Uses and abuses of enzyme therapy in cystic fibrosis. J R Soc Med [Suppl] 1998;91:2–13. 66. Mischler EH, Parrell S, Farrell PM, Odell GB. Comparison of effectiveness of pancreatic enzyme preparations in cystic fibrosis. Am J Dis Child 1982;136:1060–1063. 48 Littlewood et al. 67. Beverley DW, Kelleher J, MacDonald A, Littlewood JM, Robinson T, Walters MP. Comparison of four pancreatic extracts in cystic fibrosis. Arch Dis Child 1987;62:564–568. 68. Lowdon J, Bhal GK, Ryley HC, Doull IJ. Maintenance of growth in cystic fibrosis patients, despite reduction of pancreatic enzyme supplementation. Arch Dis Child 1998;78:377– 378. 69. Gavin J, Ellis J, Dewar AL, Rolles CJ, Connett GJ. Dietary fibre and the occurrence of gut symptoms in cystic fibrosis. Arch Dis Child 1997;76:35–37. 70. Proesmans M, De Boeck K. Evaluation of dietary fiber intake in Belgian children with cystic fibrosis: is there a link with gastrointestinal complaints? J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2002; 35:610–614. 71. Anthony H, Collins CE, Davidson G, Mews C, Robinson P, Shepherd R, et al. Pancreatic replacement therapy in cystic fibrosis: Australian guidelines. Pediatric Gastroenterological Society and Dietitians Association of Australia. J Paediatr Child Health 1999;35:125–129. 72. Schibli S, Durie PR, Tullis ED. Proper usage of pancreatic enzymes. Curr Opin Pulmon Med 2002;8:542–546. 73. Patchell C, MacDonald A, Weller PW. Pancreatic enzymes with enteral feeds. How should we give them? European Cystic Fibrosis Conference. Abstracts of Meeting of European Cystic Fibrosis Society, Berlin. 1998. p 104. 74. Kerrin D, Wolfe S, Brownlee K, Conway S. Overnight tube feeds—are enzymes necessary? XIII International Cystic Fibrosis Congress. Abstracts of Meeting of European Cystic Fibrosis Society, Stockholm. 2000. p 119. 75. Armand M, Hamosh M, Philpott JR, Resnick AK, Rosentein BJ, Hamosh A, et al. Gastric function in children with cystic fibrosis: effect of diet on gastric lipase levels and fat digestion. J Pediatr Res 2004;55:457–465. 76. Prentice AM. Body mass index standards for children. Br Med J [Clin Res] 1998;317:1401–1402. 77. Rubinstein S, Moss R, Lewiston N. Constipation and meconium ileus equivalent in patients with cystic fibrosis. Pediatrics 1986; 78:473–479. 78. Andersen HO, Hjelt K, Weaver E, Overgard K. The age-related incidence of meconium ileus equivalent in a cystic fibrosis population: the impact of high-energy intake. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 1990;11:356–360. 79. O’Haloran SM, Gilbert J, McKendrick DM, Carty HML, Heaf D. Gastrografin in acute meconium ileus equivalent. Arch Dis Child 1986;61:1128–1130. 80. Koletzko S, Stringer DA, Durie PR. Lavage treatment of distal intestinal obstruction syndrome in children with cystic fibrosis. Pediatrics 1989;83:727–733. 81. Malfroot A, Dab I. New insights into gastrointestinal reflux in cystic fibrosis by longitudinal follow-up. Arch Dis Child 1991; 66:1339–1345. 82. Heine RG, Button BM, Olinsky A, Phelan PD, Catto-Smith AG. Gastro-oesophageal reflux in infants under 6 months with cystic fibrosis. Arch Dis Child 1998;78:44–48. 83. Ledson MJ, Tran J, Walshaw MJ. Prevalence and mechanism of gastro-oesophageal reflux in adult cystic fibrosis patients. J R Soc Med 1998;91:7–9. 84. Hill SM, Phillips AD, Mearns M, Walker-Smith JA. Cows’ milk sensitive enteropathy in cystic fibrosis. Arch Dis Child 1989;64: 1251–1255. 85. Lloyd-Still JD. Cystic fibrosis, Crohn’s disease, biliary abnormalities and cancer. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 1990;11:434– 437. 86. Lloyd-Still JD. Crohn’s disease and cystic fibrosis. Dig Dis Sci 1994;39:880–885. 87. Gross V, Schoelmerich J, Denzel K, Gerok W. Relapsing pancreatitis as an initial manifestation of cystic fibrosis in young man with cystic fibrosis. Int J Pancreatol 1989;4:221–228. 88. Durno C, Corey M, Zielenski J, Tullis LC, Durie PR. Genotype phenotype correlations in patients with cystic fibrosis and pancreatitis. Gastroenterolgy 2002;123:1857–1864. 89. Witt H. Chronic pancreatitis and cystic fibrosis. Gut [Suppl] 2003;52:31–41. 90. Isreal NR, Khanna B, Cutler A, Perry M, Caplan D, Weatherly M, Gold BD. Seroprevalence of Helicobacter pylori infection in cystic fibrosis and its cross-reactivity with anti-Pseudomonas antibodies. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2000;30:426–431. 91. Valetta EA, Mastella G. Incidence of coeliac disease in a cystic fibrosis population. Acta Paediatr Scand 1989;78:784–785. 92. Colombo C, Battezzati PM, Strazzabosco M, Podda M. Liver and biliary problems in cystic fibrosis. Semin Liver Dis 1998; 18:227–235. 93. Chamarthy LM, Reinstein LJ, Schnapf B, Good RA, Bahna SL. Desensitization to pancreatic enzyme intolerance in a child with cystic fibrosis. Pediatrics 1998;102:13. 94. Collins CE, O’Loughlin EV, Henry RL. Fat gram target to achieve high energy intake in cystic fibrosis. J Pediatr Child Health 1997;31:142–147. 95. Nouri-Sorkhabi MH, Chapman BE, Kuchel PW, Grucea MA, Gaskin KJ. Parallel secretion of pancreatic phospholipase A(2), phospholipase A(1), lipase and colipase in children with exocrine pancreatic dysfunction. Pediatr Res 2000;48:735– 740. 96. Cox KL, Isenberg JN, Osher AB, Dooley RR. The effect of cimetidine on maldigestion in cystic fibrosis. J Pediatr 1979;94: 488–492. 97. Durie PR, Bell L, Linton W, Corey ML, Forstner GG. Effect of cimetidine and sodium bicarbonate on pancreatic replacement therapy in cystic fibrosis. Gut 1980;21:778–786. 98. Gow R, Bradbear R, Francis P, Shepherd R. Comparative study of varying regimens to improve steatorrhoea and creatorrhoea in cystic fibrosis: effectiveness of an enteral coated preparation with and without antacids and cimetidine. Lancet 1981;11: 1071–1074. 99. Graham DY. Pancreatic enzyme replacement: the effect of antacids and cimetidine. Dig Dis Sci 1982;27:485–490. 100. Chalmers DM, Brown RC, Miller MG, Clarke PCN, Kelleher J, Littlewood JM, et al. Influence of long-term cimetidine as an adjuvant to pancreatic enzyme therapy in cystic fibrosis. Acta Paediatr Scand 1985;74:114–117. 101. Kalnins D, Stewart C, Ellis L, Corey M, Tullis E, Pencharz PB, et al. Does the addition of bicarbonate to an enzyme microsphere preparation improve efficacy? Pediatr Pulmonol [Suppl] 1998; 17:355. 102. Ng SM, Jones AP. Drug therapies for reducing gastric acidity in people with cystic fibrosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003; 2:CD003424. 103. Heijerman HG, Lamers CB, Dijkman JH, Bakker W. Ranitidine compared with the dimethylprostaglandin E2 analogue enprostil as adjunct to pancreatic enzyme replacement in adult cystic fibrosis. Scand J Gastroenterol [Suppl] 1990;178: 26–31. 104. Heijerman RG, Lamers CB, Bakker W, Dijkman JH. Improvement of fecal fat excretion after addition of omeprazole to Pancrease in cystic fibrosis is related to residual exocrine function of the pancreas. Dig Dis Sci 1993;38:1–6. 105. Proesmans M, De Boeck K. Omeprazole, a proton pump inhibitor, improves residual steatorrhoea in cystic fibrosis patients treated with high dose pancreatic enzymes. Eur J Pediatr 2003;162:760–763. Intestinal Malabsorption in Cystic Fibrosis 106. Hendriks JJE, Wesseling GJ, Forget P. Lansoprazole therapy in young CF patients improved fat absorption, bone mineral content and hyperinflation. Neth J Med [Suppl] 1999;54:68. 107. Smith LJ, Lacaille F, Lepage G, Ronco N, Lamarre A, Roy CC. Taurine decreases fecal fatty acid and sterol excretion in cystic fibrosis. A randomized double blind trial. Am J Dis Child 1991; 145:1401–1404. 108. Sack J, Blau H, Goldfarb D, Ben-Zaray S, Katznelson D. Hyperuricosuria in cystic fibrosis patients treated with pancreatic enzyme supplements. Isr J Med Sci 1980;16:417–419. 109. Wiersbitzky S, Ballke EH, Wolf E, Paul W. Uric acid serum concentrations in CF children after pancreatic enzyme supplementation. Padiatr Grenzgeb 1989;28:171–173. 110. Couper R, Lichtman S, Cleghorn G, del Castillo V, Durie P. Serum immunoglobulin G directed against porcine trypsin in pancreatic insufficient cystic fibrosis patients receiving pancreatic enzyme supplements. Pancreas 1991;6:558–563. 111. Lee J, Ip W, Durie P. Is fibrosing colonopathy an immune mediated disease? Arch Dis Child 1997;77:66–70. 112. Lipkin GW, Vickers DW. Allergy in cystic fibrosis nurses to pancreatic extract. Lancet 1987;i:392. 113. Twarog FJ, Weinstein SF, Khaw KT, Strieder DJ, Colten HR. Hypersensitivity to pancreatic extracts in parents of patients with cystic fibrosis. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1977;59:35–40. 114. Stead RJ, Skypala I, Hodson ME, Batten JC. Enteric coated microspheres of pancreatin in the treatment of cystic fibrosis: comparison with a standard enteric coated preparation. Thorax 1987;42:533–537. 115. George DE, Pinero R, Miller AB. Comparison of two pancreatic enzyme supplements in patients with cystic fibrosis. Adv Ther 1990;7:109–118. 116. Brady MS, Rickard KA, Yul PL, Eigen H. Effectiveness and safety of small vs. large doses of enteric coated pancreatic enzymes in reducing steatorrhea in children with cystic fibrosis: a prospective randomized study. Pediatr Pulmonol 1991;10:79–85. 117. Elliott RB, Escobar LC, Lees HR, Akroyd RM, Reilly HC. A comparison between two pancreatin microsphere preparations in cystic fibrosis. N Z Med J 1992;105:107–108. 118. Beker LT, Fink RJ, Shamas FH, Chaney HR, Kluft J, Evans E, et al. Comparison of weight based dosages of enteric-coated microtablet enzyme preparations in patients with cystic fibrosis. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 1994;19:191–197. 49 119. Sinaasappel M, Swart GR, Hoekstra JH, Houwen RH, van der Laag J, Gijsbers CF, et al. Double-blind, cross-over study to prove the equivalence of Creon 10,000 minimicrospheres vs. Creon 8000 microspheres in patients with cystic fibrosis. Pediatr Pulmonol [Suppl] 1998;17:358. 120. Patchell CJ, Desai M, Weller PH, MacDonald A, Smyth RL, Bush A, et al. Creon 10,000 minimicrospheres versus Creon 8,000 microspheres—an open randomised crossover preference study. J Cystic Fibrosis 2002;1:287–291. 121. Stern RC, Eisenberg JD, Wagner JS, Ahrens R, Rock M, doPico G, et al. A comparison of the efficacy and tolerance of pancrelipase and placebo in the treatment of steatorrhea in cystic fibrosis patients with clinical exocrine pancreatic insufficiency. Am J Gastroenterol 2000;95:1932–1938. 122. Konstan M, Stern R, Trout R, Sherman J, Eigen H, Wagener J, et al. Ultrase MT12 and Ultrase MT20 in the treatment of exocrine pancreatic insufficiency in cystic fibrosis: safety and efficacy. Pediatr Pulmonol [Suppl] 2004;27:339. 123. Morrison G, Morrison JM, Redmond AOR, Byers L, McCracken K, Dodge JA. Comparison between a standard pancreatic supplement and a high enzyme preparation. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 1992;6:549–555. 124. Chazalette JP. A double blind placebo controlled trial of a pancreatic enzyme formulation (Panzytrat 25,000) in the treatment of impaired lipid digestion in patients with cystic fibrosis. Drug Invest 1993;5:274–280. 125. Bowler IM, Wolfe SP, Owens HM, Sheldon TA, Littlewood JM, Walters MP. A double blind lipase for lipase comparison of a high and standard pancreatic enzyme preparation in cystic fibrosis. Arch Dis Child 1993;68:227–230. 126. Friesen C, Prestige C. Comparison of a high strength pancreatic enzyme preparation and a standard strength preparation in cystic fibrosis. Adv Ther 1995;12:236–244. 127. Taylor CJ, McGraw J, Ghosal S. Evaluation of Creon 25,000 compared to standard lipase pancreatic enzyme supplementation in cystic fibrosis patients. Isr J Med Sci 1996;32:220. 128. Robinson PJ, Natoli G. Comparison of high-dose and standard dose pancreatic enzyme capsules in children with cystic fibrosis. Aust J Hosp Pharm 1998;28:160–164. 129. Peschke GJ. Active components and galenic aspects of enzyme preparations. In: Lankisch PG, editor. Pancreatic enzymes in health and disease. London: Springer Verlag; 1991. pp 55–64.