Reevaluating therapeutic strategies in Crohn’s disease: Comparing Modulen and budesonide

Abstract

This article explores the significant implications of the study by Ovadia et al, which innovatively compares the efficacy of a nutritional intervention (Modulen) to conventional pharmaceutical therapy (budesonide) in promoting mucosal healing in Crohn’s disease. Highlighting the paradox of a well-established yet underutilized nutritional approach, the findings suggest that Modulen may offer comparable therapeutic benefits despite its high withdrawal rate due to adherence challenges. This advancement underscores the evolving paradigm in inflammatory bowel disease treatment, shifting focus toward non-pharmacologic alternatives that target both clinical remission and endoscopic healing. The article advocates for the development of integrative treatment strategies that balance efficacy, patient adherence, and long-term disease management, emphasizing the need for further research to refine and optimize the role of nutritional therapies in clinical practice.

Keywords: Crohn’s disease; Modulen; Budesonide; Enteral nutrition; Therapeutic strategies

Core Tip: Because of the need for effective treatments for mild to moderate Crohn’s disease, nutritional interventions like Modulen have been suggested as a potential option alongside pharmaceutical treatments. Nutritional therapy can improve clinical and endoscopic outcomes, though issues like taste intolerance and adherence remain challenges. Pharmaceutical treatments, such as budesonide, show promise in reducing inflammation, but they may be less effective for mucosal healing. Combining both approaches may offer better management for Crohn’s disease patients. More research is needed to explore long-term benefits and improve patient adherence to treatments.