***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: Goals To investigate the effectiveness and safety of mesalazine , with or without Lactobacillus casei , in preventing recurrence of symptomatic diverticular disease of the colon . Background Both mesalazine and probiotics showed recently their effectiveness in obtaining remission of symptomatic uncomplicated diverticular disease of the colon . Consistent data are not available on the optimal therapy to prevent recurrence of symptomatic diverticular disease of the colon . Study Multicenter , prospect i ve , r and omized , open-label study . Ninety consecutive patients ( 36 men , 54 women , mean age 67.5 y , range 39 to 84 y ) , previously affected by symptomatic uncomplicated diverticular disease of the colon ( remission obtained with rifaximin 800 mg/d plus mesalazine 2.4 g/d for 10 d , followed by mesalazine 1.6 g/d for 8 wk ) , were enrolled in a 12-month follow-up . The following symptoms were assessed at entry and through follow-up by using a quantitative scale : ( 1 ) constipation , ( 2 ) diarrhea , ( 3 ) abdominal pain , ( 4 ) rectal bleeding , and ( 5 ) mucus with the stools . After recruitment , the patients were r and omly assigned to one of the following 3 groups : mesalazine 1.6 g/d ( group M ) , L. casei DG 16 billion/d for 15 d/mo ( group L ) ; mesalazine 1.6 g/d+L. casei DG 16 billion/d for 15 d/mo ( group LM ) . Results Eighty-five patients completed the study ( 94.5 % ) : 2 patients ( 2.22 % , 1 of group M and 1 of group LM ) were withdrawn from the study for protocol violation and 1 ( 1.11 % ) for hospital admission due to acute pulmonary disease ( group L ) ; 2 patients ( 2.22 % ) were lost to follow-up . Seventy-five patients ( 88.2 % ) were symptom free after the 12th month of treatment ( overall symptomatic score : ( 0 ) : 23/27 patients of group M [ on intention to treat : 76.7 % confidence interval ( CI 95 % : 61.5 to 91.8 ) ] , 23/29 of group L [ on intention to treat : 76.7 % ( CI 95 % : 61.5 to 91.8 ) ] , 29/29 of group LM [ on intention to treat : 96 % ( CI 95 % : 94.2 to 100 ) ] ( P<0.05 ) . Only 10 patients ( 11.1 % ) showed recurrence of symptoms ( overall symptomatic score : 68 ) . Conclusions Both mesalazine and L. casei DG seem to be effective in preventing recurrence of symptomatic uncomplicated diverticular disease of the colon , but their association seems to be more promising in this field Forty consecutive patients affected by recurrent attacks of symptomatic uncomplicated diverticular disease of the colon were evaluated to investigate the effectiveness of 2 different mesalazine therapeutic schedules in preventing recurrence of the disease . The patients were r and omly enrolled and treated with mesalazine 1.6 g/d ( group A ) or mesalazine 1.6 g/d 10 days per month ( group B ) . Thirty-four patients completed the study ( 85 % ) : 3 ( 7.5 % , 1 in group A and 2 in group B ) were lost to follow-up , 2 ( 5 % , both group B ) were withdrawn from the study for protocol violation , and 1 ( 2.5 % ) for hospital admission for stroke ( group A ) . Twenty-three patients ( 67.65 % ) were symptom free after 24 months of treatment ( overall symptomatic score , 0 ) : 14 of 18 in group A ( per- protocol , 77.78 % ; intention to treat , 70 % [ 95 % confidence interval [ CI ] , 61.5–91.8 ] ) , 9 of 16 in group B ( per protocol , 56.25 % ; intention to treat , 45 % [ 95 % CI , 61.5–91.8 ] ; P < 0.05 ) . Four patients ( 10 % ) improved , but were not completely symptom free . Six patients ( 15 % ) showed recurrence of symptoms : 1 in group A ( 5.56 % ) and 5 in group B ( 31.25 % ; P < 0.005 ; overall symptomatic score , 68 ) . Daily mesalazine supplying seems to be more effective than cyclic supplying in maintaining remission in recurrent symptomatic uncomplicated diverticular disease Previous studies have reached conflicting conclusions regarding the efficacy of mesalazine in the prevention of recurrent diverticulitis BACKGROUND & AIMS No therapy has been proven to prevent the recurrence of diverticulitis . Mesalamine has shown efficacy in preventing relapse in inflammatory bowel disease , and there is preliminary evidence that it might be effective for diverticular disease . We investigated the efficacy of mesalamine in preventing recurrence of diverticulitis in 2 identical but separate phase 3 , r and omized , double-blind , placebo-controlled , multicenter trials ( identical confirmatory trials were conducted for regulatory reasons ) . METHODS We evaluated the efficacy and safety of multimatrix mesalamine vs placebo in the prevention of recurrent diverticulitis in 590 ( PREVENT1 ) and 592 ( PREVENT2 ) adult patients with ≥1 episodes of acute diverticulitis in the previous 24 months that resolved without surgery . Patients received mesalamine ( 1.2 g , 2.4 g , or 4.8 g ) or placebo once daily for 104 weeks . The primary end point was the proportion of recurrence-free patients at week 104 . Diverticulitis recurrence was defined as surgical intervention at any time for diverticular disease or presence of computed tomography scan results demonstrating bowel wall thickening ( > 5 mm ) and /or fat str and ing consistent with diverticulitis . For a portion of the study , recurrence also required the presence of abdominal pain and an increase in white blood cells . RESULTS Mesalamine did not reduce the rate of diverticulitis recurrence at week 104 . Among patients in PREVENT1 , 53%-63 % did not have disease recurrence , compared with 65 % of those given placebo . Among patients in PREVENT2 , 59%-69 % of patients did not have disease recurrence , compared with 68 % of those given placebo . Mesalamine did not reduce time to recurrence , and the proportions of patients requiring surgery were comparable among treatment groups . No new adverse events were identified with mesalamine administration . CONCLUSIONS Mesalamine was not superior to placebo in preventing recurrent diverticulitis . Mesalamine is not recommended for this indication . Clinical Trials.gov ID : NCT00545740 and NCT00545103 In uncomplicated diverticular disease , treatment is aim ed at relieving symptoms . The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy of mesalazine for symptomatic relief of uncomplicated diverticular disease of the colon . Two hundred sixty-eight consecutive eligible out patients ( 122 male , 146 female ; age , 66.1 years ; range , 31–81 years ) were enrolled in four treatment schedules in a r and omized fashion : Group R1 ( 66 patients ) , rifaximin , 200 mg bid ; Group R2 ( 69 patients ) , rifaximin , 400 mg bid ; Group M1 ( 67 patients ) , mesalazine , 400 mg bid ; and Group M2 ( 66 patients ) , mesalazine , 800 mg bid . Treatments were administered for 10 days every month for 12 months . Clinical evaluations were performed at admission and at 3-month intervals for 12 months considering 12 clinical variables ( upper and lower abdominal pain/discomfort , tenesmus , diarrhea , abdominal tenderness , fever , bloating , general illness , nausea , emesis , dysuria , bleeding ) grade d as 0 = no symptoms , 1 = mild , 2 = moderate , and 3 = severe . The Global Symptomatic Score ( GSS ) was calculated using the sum of each symptom score . Two hundred forty-four patients completed the 12- month study ; 24 were discontinued ( 14 treated with rifaximin and 10 treated with mesalazine ) either as voluntary dropouts or because they developed side effects and /or complications . Group M2 demonstrated a lower frequency of many symptoms after 6 and 12 months of treatment ; the mean GSS was significantly lower in Group M2 after 6 and 12 months of therapy by both intention-to-treat and per- protocol analyses . Patients treated with mesalazine ( Groups M1+M2 ) had a lower GSS than subjects treated with rifaximin ( Groups R1+R2 ) during the 12-month follow-up period . We conclude that cyclic administration of mesalazine is effective for symptomatic relief of  uncomplicated diverticular disease of the colon . Some symptoms showed greater improvement with mesalazine , 800 mg bid , than with the other treatment schedules BACKGROUND / AIMS Four different therapeutic schedules with mesalazine and /or probiotics were assessed in preventing recurrence of symptomatic diverticular disease ( DD ) of the colon . METHODOLOGY A prospect i ve , dose-finding study was conducted on 75 patients , enrolled in an open fashion :  mesalazine 800mg/daily ( group M1 ) or mesalazine 1.6gr 10 days/month ( group M2 ) ; mesalazine 800mg/daily + Lactobacillus casei DG 16 billion/day for 10 day/month ( group LM1 ) or mesalazine 1.6gr + Lactobacillus casei DG 16 billion/day for 10 day/month ( group LM2 ) ; Lactobacillus casei DG 16 billion/day for 10 day/month ( group L ) . RESULTS Seventy one patients completed the study ( 94.66 % ) . Sixty six patients ( 88 % ) were symptom-free after the 24th month of treatment : 11 of group M1 ( on i-t-t : 84 % [ CI 95 % : 55.5 - 98.8 ] ) , 8 of group M2 ( on i-t-t : 80 % [ CI 95 % : 44.39 - 97.48 ] ) , 15 of group LM1 ( on i-t-t : 93.75 % [ CI 95 % : 69.77 - 99.84 ] ) , 12 of group LM2 ( on i-t-t : 92.30 % [ CI 95 % : 63.97 - 99.81 ] ) , 20 in group L ( on i-t-t : 86.95 % [ CI 95 % : 66.41 - 97.22 ] ) ( p-ns ) . Four patients ( 5.33 % ) suspended the treatment during the follow-up : all experienced recurrence of symptoms ( 100 % ) , and 2 of them developed diverticulitis ( 50 % ) . CONCLUSIONS Mesalazine and /or Lactobacillus casei seem to be effective in maintaining remission of DD for long-time . Moreover , we found recurrence of the disease and complications in all patients suspending treatments In order to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of mesalazine ( 5-ASA ) in the prophylaxis of symptomatic relapses , of major complications and of microhemorrhagic phenomena in diverticular disease of the large intestine ( MDC ) , prospect i ve clinical study was conducted on patients with light-moderate symptomatic MDC under treatment with sulbactam-ampicillin 1.5 g/12 h i.m . and rifaximine 400 mg/12 h per os for 7 days . Follow-up period of 5 years with seriated checkups and laboratory and instrumentation controls . End points are represented by the relapse on inflammation and /or by the occurrence of major complications . On enrollment , 166 patients were r and omized to receive mesalazine ( Pentacol tablets -- SOFAR S.p . A. ) 400 mg b.i.d . per os for 8 weeks ( 81 patients ; group M ) or no supplementary treatment ( 85 patients ; group C ) . After 4 years of follow-up , 44 patients dropped out of the study ( 9 because of major complications , 3 for massive hemorrhage , and 32 drop outs ) . Symptomatic relapses occurred in 51 patients ( 12 M ; 39 C ) , while minor diverticular hemorrhages occurred in 43 patients ( 12 M ; 31 C ) , with an estimated probability of remaining free respectively from symptomatic relapse ( p=0.00005 ) and from microhemorrhagic phenomena ( p=0.001 ) decisively in favor of the group treated with mesalazine . The duration of abdominal pain due to diverticolitis was also shorter in patients of group M ( p=0.0002 ) , while the incidence of major complications and side effects was comparable in the two groups . In conclusion , supplementary treatment with mesalazine in patients affected with MDC -- at a follow-up limited to 48 months -- proved to be well tolerated and effective in reducing the 
    Output:
    
Treatment with mesalazine seems to be effective in achieving symptom relief and in the primary prevention of diverticulitis in patients with SUDD