-
Gastroenterology Jan 2020Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is an allergen-mediated inflammatory disease with no approved treatment in the United States. Dupilumab, a VelocImmune-derived human... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND & AIMS
Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is an allergen-mediated inflammatory disease with no approved treatment in the United States. Dupilumab, a VelocImmune-derived human monoclonal antibody against the interleukin (IL) 4 receptor, inhibits IL4 and IL13 signaling. Dupilumab is effective in the treatment of allergic, atopic, and type 2 diseases, so we assessed its efficacy and safety in patients with EoE.
METHODS
We performed a phase 2 study of adults with active EoE (2 episodes of dysphagia/week with peak esophageal eosinophil density of 15 or more eosinophils per high-power field), from May 12, 2015, through November 9, 2016, at 14 sites. Participants were randomly assigned to groups that received weekly subcutaneous injections of dupilumab (300 mg, n = 23) or placebo (n = 24) for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was change from baseline to week 10 in Straumann Dysphagia Instrument (SDI) patient-reported outcome (PRO) score. We also assessed histologic features of EoE (peak esophageal intraepithelial eosinophil count and EoE histologic scores), endoscopically visualized features (endoscopic reference score), esophageal distensibility, and safety.
RESULTS
The mean SDI PRO score was 6.4 when the study began. In the dupilumab group, SDI PRO scores were reduced by a mean value of 3.0 at week 10 compared with a mean reduction of 1.3 in the placebo group (P = .0304). At week 12, dupilumab reduced the peak esophageal intraepithelial eosinophil count by a mean 86.8 eosinophils per high-power field (reduction of 107.1%; P < .0001 vs placebo), the EoE-histologic scoring system (HSS) severity score by 68.3% (P < .0001 vs placebo), and the endoscopic reference score by 1.6 (P = .0006 vs placebo). Dupilumab increased esophageal distensibility by 18% vs placebo (P < .0001). Higher proportions of patients in the dupilumab group developed injection-site erythema (35% vs 8% in the placebo group) and nasopharyngitis (17% vs 4% in the placebo group).
CONCLUSIONS
In a phase 2 trial of patients with active EoE, dupilumab reduced dysphagia, histologic features of disease (including eosinophilic infiltration and a marker of type 2 inflammation), and abnormal endoscopic features compared with placebo. Dupilumab increased esophageal distensibility and was generally well tolerated. ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT02379052.
Topics: Adult; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Deglutition Disorders; Double-Blind Method; Eosinophilic Esophagitis; Esophageal Mucosa; Esophagoscopy; Female; Humans; Interleukin-4 Receptor alpha Subunit; Male; Middle Aged; Patient Reported Outcome Measures; Placebos; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
PubMed: 31593702
DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.09.042 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2021Botulinum toxin type A (BontA) is the most frequent treatment for facial wrinkles, but its effectiveness and safety have not previously been assessed in a Cochrane... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Botulinum toxin type A (BontA) is the most frequent treatment for facial wrinkles, but its effectiveness and safety have not previously been assessed in a Cochrane Review.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of all commercially available botulinum toxin type A products for the treatment of any type of facial wrinkles.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases up to May 2020: the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS. We also searched five trials registers, and checked the reference lists of included studies for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs).
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included RCTs with over 50 participants, comparing BontA versus placebo, other types of BontA, or fillers (hyaluronic acid), for treating facial wrinkles in adults.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Primary outcomes were participant assessment of success and major adverse events (AEs) (eyelid ptosis, eyelid sensory disorder, strabismus). Secondary outcomes included physician assessment of success; proportion of participants with at least one AE and duration of treatment effect. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 65 RCTs, involving 14,919 randomised participants. Most participants were female, aged 18 to 65 years. All participants were outpatients (private office or day clinic). Study duration was between one week and one year. No studies were assessed as low risk of bias in all domains; the overall risk of bias was unclear for most studies. The most common comparator was placebo (36 studies). An active control was used in 19 studies. There were eight dose-ranging studies of onabotulinumtoxinA, and a small number of studies compared against fillers. Treatment was given in one cycle (54 studies), two cycles (three studies), or three or more cycles (eight studies). The treated regions were glabella (43 studies), crow's feet (seven studies), forehead (two studies), perioral (two studies), full face (one study), or more than two regions (nine studies). Most studies analysed moderate to severe wrinkles; mean duration of treatment was 20 weeks. The following results summarise the main comparisons, based on studies of one treatment cycle for the glabella. AEs were collected over the duration of these studies (over four to 24 weeks). Compared to placebo, onabotulinumtoxinA-20 U probably has a higher success rate when assessed by participants (risk ratio (RR) 19.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) 8.60 to 43.99; 575 participants; 4 studies; moderate-certainty evidence) or physicians (RR 17.10, 95% CI 10.07 to 29.05; 1339 participants; 7 studies; moderate-certainty evidence) at week four. Major AEs are probably higher with onabotulinumtoxinA-20 U (Peto OR 3.62, 95% CI 1.50 to 8.74; 1390 participants; 8 studies; moderate-certainty evidence), but there may be no difference in any AEs (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.45; 1388 participants; 8 studies; low-certainty evidence). Compared to placebo, abobotulinumtoxinA-50 U has a higher participant-assessed success rate at week four (RR 21.22, 95% CI 7.40 to 60.56; 915 participants; 6 studies; high-certainty evidence); and probably has a higher physician-assessed success rate (RR 14.93, 95% CI 8.09 to 27.55; 1059 participants; 7 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). There are probably more major AEs with abobotulinumtoxinA-50 U (Peto OR 3.36, 95% CI 0.88 to 12.87; 1294 participants; 7 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). Any AE may be more common with abobotulinumtoxinA-50 U (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.49; 1471 participants; 8 studies; low-certainty evidence). Compared to placebo, incobotulinumtoxinA-20 U probably has a higher participant-assessed success rate at week four (RR 66.57, 95% CI 13.50 to 328.28; 547 participants; 2 studies; moderate-certainty evidence), and physician-assessed success rate (RR 134.62, 95% CI 19.05 to 951.45; 547 participants; 2 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). Major AEs were not observed (547 participants; 2 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be no difference between groups in any AEs (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.53; 547 participants; 2 studies; low-certainty evidence). AbobotulinumtoxinA-50 U is no different to onabotulinumtoxinA-20 U in participant-assessed success rate (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.08, 388 participants, 1 study, high-certainty evidence) and physician-assessed success rate (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.06; 388 participants; 1 study; high-certainty evidence) at week four. Major AEs are probably more likely in the abobotulinumtoxinA-50 U group than the onabotulinumtoxinA-20 U group (Peto OR 2.65, 95% CI 0.77 to 9.09; 433 participants; 1 study; moderate-certainty evidence). There is probably no difference in any AE (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.54; 492 participants; 2 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). IncobotulinumtoxinA-24 U may be no different to onabotulinumtoxinA-24 U in physician-assessed success rate at week four (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.05; 381 participants; 1 study; low-certainty evidence) (participant assessment was not measured). One participant reported ptosis with onabotulinumtoxinA, but we are uncertain of the risk of AEs (Peto OR 0.02, 95% CI 0.00 to 1.77; 381 participants; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). Compared to placebo, daxibotulinumtoxinA-40 U probably has a higher participant-assessed success rate (RR 21.10, 95% CI 11.31 to 39.34; 683 participants; 2 studies; moderate-certainty evidence) and physician-assessed success rate (RR 23.40, 95% CI 12.56 to 43.61; 683 participants; 2 studies; moderate-certainty evidence) at week four. Major AEs were not observed (716 participants; 2 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be an increase in any AE with daxibotulinumtoxinA compared to placebo (RR 2.23, 95% CI 1.46 to 3.40; 716 participants; 2 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). Major AEs reported were mainly ptosis; BontA is also known to carry a risk of strabismus or eyelid sensory disorders.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
BontA treatment reduces wrinkles within four weeks of treatment, but probably increases risk of ptosis. We found several heterogeneous studies (different types or doses of BontA, number of cycles, and different facial regions) hindering meta-analyses. The certainty of the evidence for effectiveness outcomes was high, low or moderate; for AEs, very low to moderate. Future RCTs should compare the most common BontA (onabotulinumtoxinA, abobotulinumtoxinA, incobotulinumtoxinA, daxibotulinumtoxinA, prabotulinumtoxinA) and evaluate long-term outcomes. There is a lack of evidence about the effects of multiple cycles of BontA, frequency of major AEs, duration of effect, efficacy of recently-approved BontA and comparisons with other treatments.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Bias; Botulinum Toxins, Type A; Dermal Fillers; Face; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Placebos; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Skin Aging
PubMed: 34224576
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011301.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2021Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated with a range of adverse pregnancy outcomes for mother and infant. The prevention of GDM using lifestyle interventions... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated with a range of adverse pregnancy outcomes for mother and infant. The prevention of GDM using lifestyle interventions has proven difficult. The gut microbiome (the composite of bacteria present in the intestines) influences host inflammatory pathways, glucose and lipid metabolism and, in other settings, alteration of the gut microbiome has been shown to impact on these host responses. Probiotics are one way of altering the gut microbiome but little is known about their use in influencing the metabolic environment of pregnancy. This is an update of a review last published in 2014.
OBJECTIVES
To systematically assess the effects of probiotic supplements used either alone or in combination with pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions on the prevention of GDM.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (20 March 2020), and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised and cluster-randomised trials comparing the use of probiotic supplementation with either placebo or diet for the prevention of the development of GDM. Cluster-randomised trials were eligible for inclusion but none were identified. Quasi-randomised and cross-over design studies were not eligible for inclusion in this review. Studies presented only as abstracts with no subsequent full report of study results were only included if study authors confirmed that data in the abstract came from the final analysis. Otherwise, the abstract was left awaiting classification.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data and assessed risk of bias of included studies. Data were checked for accuracy.
MAIN RESULTS
In this update, we included seven trials with 1647 participants. Two studies were in overweight and obese women, two in obese women and three did not exclude women based on their weight. All included studies compared probiotics with placebo. The included studies were at low risk of bias overall except for one study that had an unclear risk of bias. We excluded two studies, eight studies were ongoing and three studies are awaiting classification. Six included studies with 1440 participants evaluated the risk of GDM. It is uncertain if probiotics have any effect on the risk of GDM compared to placebo (mean risk ratio (RR) 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54 to 1.20; 6 studies, 1440 women; low-certainty evidence). The evidence was low certainty due to substantial heterogeneity and wide CIs that included both appreciable benefit and appreciable harm. Probiotics increase the risk of pre-eclampsia compared to placebo (RR 1.85, 95% CI 1.04 to 3.29; 4 studies, 955 women; high-certainty evidence) and may increase the risk of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (RR 1.39, 95% CI 0.96 to 2.01, 4 studies, 955 women), although the CIs for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy also indicated probiotics may have no effect. There were few differences between groups for other primary outcomes. Probiotics make little to no difference in the risk of caesarean section (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.17; 6 studies, 1520 women; high-certainty evidence), and probably make little to no difference in maternal weight gain during pregnancy (MD 0.30 kg, 95% CI -0.67 to 1.26; 4 studies, 853 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Probiotics probably make little to no difference in the incidence of large-for-gestational age infants (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.36; 4 studies, 919 infants; moderate-certainty evidence) and may make little to no difference in neonatal adiposity (2 studies, 320 infants; data not pooled; low-certainty evidence). One study reported adiposity as fat mass (MD -0.04 kg, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.04), and one study reported adiposity as percentage fat (MD -0.10%, 95% CI -1.19 to 0.99). We do not know the effect of probiotics on perinatal mortality (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.02; 3 studies, 709 infants; low-certainty evidence), a composite measure of neonatal morbidity (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.35; 2 studies, 623 infants; low-certainty evidence), or neonatal hypoglycaemia (mean RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.92; 2 studies, 586 infants; low-certainty evidence). No included studies reported on perineal trauma, postnatal depression, maternal and infant development of diabetes or neurosensory disability.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Low-certainty evidence from six trials has not clearly identified the effect of probiotics on the risk of GDM. However, high-certainty evidence suggests there is an increased risk of pre-eclampsia with probiotic administration. There were no other clear differences between probiotics and placebo among the other primary outcomes. The certainty of evidence for this review's primary outcomes ranged from low to high, with downgrading due to concerns about substantial heterogeneity between studies, wide CIs and low event rates. Given the risk of harm and little observed benefit, we urge caution in using probiotics during pregnancy. The apparent effect of probiotics on pre-eclampsia warrants particular consideration. Eight studies are currently ongoing, and we suggest that these studies take particular care in follow-up and examination of the effect on pre-eclampsia and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. In addition, the underlying potential physiology of the relationship between probiotics and pre-eclampsia risk should be considered.
Topics: Bias; Cesarean Section; Diabetes, Gestational; Female; Humans; Obesity; Overweight; Placebos; Pre-Eclampsia; Pregnancy; Probiotics; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 33870484
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009951.pub3 -
Proceedings of the National Academy of... Oct 2014Autism spectrum disorder (ASD), characterized by both impaired communication and social interaction, and by stereotypic behavior, affects about 1 in 68, predominantly... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
Autism spectrum disorder (ASD), characterized by both impaired communication and social interaction, and by stereotypic behavior, affects about 1 in 68, predominantly males. The medico-economic burdens of ASD are enormous, and no recognized treatment targets the core features of ASD. In a placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized trial, young men (aged 13-27) with moderate to severe ASD received the phytochemical sulforaphane (n = 29)--derived from broccoli sprout extracts--or indistinguishable placebo (n = 15). The effects on behavior of daily oral doses of sulforaphane (50-150 µmol) for 18 wk, followed by 4 wk without treatment, were quantified by three widely accepted behavioral measures completed by parents/caregivers and physicians: the Aberrant Behavior Checklist (ABC), Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS), and Clinical Global Impression Improvement Scale (CGI-I). Initial scores for ABC and SRS were closely matched for participants assigned to placebo and sulforaphane. After 18 wk, participants receiving placebo experienced minimal change (<3.3%), whereas those receiving sulforaphane showed substantial declines (improvement of behavior): 34% for ABC (P < 0.001, comparing treatments) and 17% for SRS scores (P = 0.017). On CGI-I, a significantly greater number of participants receiving sulforaphane had improvement in social interaction, abnormal behavior, and verbal communication (P = 0.015-0.007). Upon discontinuation of sulforaphane, total scores on all scales rose toward pretreatment levels. Dietary sulforaphane, of recognized low toxicity, was selected for its capacity to reverse abnormalities that have been associated with ASD, including oxidative stress and lower antioxidant capacity, depressed glutathione synthesis, reduced mitochondrial function and oxidative phosphorylation, increased lipid peroxidation, and neuroinflammmation.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Child Development Disorders, Pervasive; Humans; Isothiocyanates; Male; Placebos; Social Behavior; Sulfoxides; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
PubMed: 25313065
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1416940111 -
Gut Microbes 2018Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis HN019 (HN019) ameliorates chronic idiopathic constipation. Our aim was to determine the efficacy and safety of 28-day... (Clinical Trial)
Clinical Trial Randomized Controlled Trial
Effects of 28-day Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis HN019 supplementation on colonic transit time and gastrointestinal symptoms in adults with functional constipation: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, and dose-ranging trial.
Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis HN019 (HN019) ameliorates chronic idiopathic constipation. Our aim was to determine the efficacy and safety of 28-day supplementation with 1 × 10 or 1 × 10 CFU of HN019/day for constipation. A total of 228 adults who were diagnosed with functional constipation according to the Rome III criteria were randomized in a double-blind and placebo-controlled trial. Colonic transit time (CTT), the primary outcome, and secondary outcomes that were measured using inventories-patient assessment of constipation symptoms (PAC-SYM) and quality of life (PAC-QoL), bowel function index (BFI), bowel movement frequency (BMF), stool consistency, degree of straining, bowel emptying, bloating, and pain severity-were assessed. Ancillary parameters and harms were also evaluated. There were no statistically significant differences in the primary or secondary outcomes between interventions. A post hoc analysis of 65 participants with fewer than 3 bowel movements per week (BMF ≤ 3/week) showed a physiologically relevant increase in weekly BMF in the high- (+2.0) and low-dose (+1.7) HN019 groups-by RMANOVA, the HN019 groups with BMF ≤ 3/week, pooled together, had a higher BMF versus placebo (P value = 0.01). Thus, improving low stool frequency could be a target of future interventions with HN019. High-dose HN019 also decreased the degree of straining at Day 28 versus placebo in those with BMF ≤ 3/week (P value = 0.02). Three unlikely related AEs-2 with low-dose HN019 and 1 with placebo-were followed until full recovery. In conclusion, although there were no differences in the primary analysis, HN019 is well tolerated and improves BMF in adults with low stool frequency.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Bifidobacterium animalis; Constipation; Double-Blind Method; Female; Gastrointestinal Transit; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Placebos; Probiotics; Quality of Life; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
PubMed: 29227175
DOI: 10.1080/19490976.2017.1412908 -
Journal of Child and Adolescent... Nov 2019A randomized pilot trial of gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms targeting probiotic for quality of life in autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Thirteen children, 3-12 years of... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
A randomized pilot trial of gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms targeting probiotic for quality of life in autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Thirteen children, 3-12 years of age with ASD, anxiety, and GI symptoms, were randomized into a probiotic crossover trial of 8 weeks each on VISBIOME and placebo separated by a 3-week washout. VISBIOME contains eight probiotic species, mostly and . Primary outcome was the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL) GI module. Secondary outcomes included gut microbiota analysis, the Parent-Rated Anxiety Scale for ASD (PRAS-ASD), and parent-selected target symptoms. A mixed analysis model was applied. Thirteen children were randomized, with 10 completing the study (77% retention): 6 in probiotic/placebo sequence, 4 in placebo/probiotic sequence. Adherence to study treatment was 96%. There were no serious adverse events (AEs), and more nonserious AEs occurred with placebo than with probiotic, including those attributable to treatment. Only 6 of the 10 guessed the correct treatment at the end of week 8. Over the 19-week trial, each outcome improved from baseline and PedsQL correlated significantly with abundance of without discernable changes to microbiota composition/diversity. Although probiotic showed more improvement than placebo, PedsQL and PRAS-ASD were not statistically significant, as expected at this sample size. PedsQL effect size was = 0.49 by the general model and = 0.79 by simple comparison of week 8 changes. A parent-selected target symptom showed significant improvement in GI complaints on probiotic compared with placebo ( = 0.02, = 0.79). Probiotic effects carried over through the 3-week washout. The VISBIOME formulation was safe and suggested a health benefit in children with ASD and GI symptoms who retained . The moderate effect size compared with placebo warrants a larger trial using a parallel-group design.
Topics: Autism Spectrum Disorder; Child; Child, Preschool; Female; Humans; Male; Pilot Projects; Placebos; Probiotics; Quality of Life
PubMed: 31478755
DOI: 10.1089/cap.2018.0156 -
Microbiology Spectrum Oct 2021Asthma is a multifactorial disorder, and microbial dysbiosis enhances lung inflammation and asthma-related symptoms. Probiotics have shown anti-inflammatory effects and... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
Asthma is a multifactorial disorder, and microbial dysbiosis enhances lung inflammation and asthma-related symptoms. Probiotics have shown anti-inflammatory effects and could regulate the gut-lung axis. Thus, a 3-month randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled human trial was performed to investigate the adjunctive efficacy of probiotics in managing asthma. Fifty-five asthmatic patients were randomly assigned to a probiotic group ( = 29; received Bifidobacterium lactis Probio-M8 powder and Symbicort Turbuhaler) and a placebo group ( = 26; received placebo and Symbicort Turbuhaler), and all 55 subjects provided details of their clinical history and demographic data. However, only 31 patients donated a complete set of fecal and blood samples at all three time points for further analysis. Compared with those of the placebo group, co-administering Probio-M8 with Symbicort Turbuhaler significantly decreased the fractional exhaled nitric oxide level at day 30 (= 0.049) and improved the asthma control test score at the end of the intervention (= 0.023). More importantly, the level of alveolar nitric oxide concentration decreased significantly among the probiotic receivers at day 30 (= 0.038), and the symptom relief effect was even more obvious at day 90 (= 0.001). Probiotic co-administration increased the resilience of the gut microbiome, which was reflected by only minor fluctuations in the gut microbiome diversity (> 0.05, probiotic receivers; < 0.05, placebo receivers). Additionally, the probiotic receivers showed significantly changes in some species-level genome bins (SGBs), namely, increases in potentially beneficial species Bifidobacterium animalis, Bifidobacterium longum, and sp. CAG and decreases in Parabacteroides distasonis and (< 0.05). Compared with that of the placebo group, the gut metabolic potential of probiotic receivers exhibited increased levels of predicted microbial bioactive metabolites (linoleoyl ethanolamide, adrenergic acid, erythronic acid) and serum metabolites (5-dodecenoic acid, tryptophan, sphingomyelin) during/after intervention. Collectively, our results suggested that co-administering Probio-M8 synergized with conventional therapy to alleviate diseases associated with the gut-lung axis, like asthma, possibly via activating multiple anti-inflammatory pathways. The human gut microbiota has a potential effect on the pathogenesis of asthma and is closely related to the disease phenotype. Our trial has demonstrated that co-administering Probio-M8 synergized with conventional therapy to alleviate asthma symptoms. The findings of the present study provide new insights into the pathogenesis and treatment of asthma, mechanisms of novel therapeutic strategies, and application of probiotics-based therapy.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Anti-Asthmatic Agents; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Asthma; Bifidobacterium animalis; Budesonide, Formoterol Fumarate Drug Combination; Double-Blind Method; Dysbiosis; Female; Gastrointestinal Microbiome; Humans; Lung; Male; Middle Aged; Nitric Oxide; Placebos; Probiotics; Young Adult
PubMed: 34612663
DOI: 10.1128/Spectrum.00859-21 -
Clinical and Translational Science May 2021VM202 is a plasmid DNA encoding two isoforms of hepatocyte growth factor (HGF). A previous phase II study in subjects with painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN)... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
VM202 is a plasmid DNA encoding two isoforms of hepatocyte growth factor (HGF). A previous phase II study in subjects with painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) showed significant reductions in pain. A phase III study was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of VM202 in DPN. The trial was conducted in two parts, one for 9 months (DPN 3-1) with 500 subjects (VM202: 336 subjects; and placebo: 164) and a preplanned subset of 101 subjects (VM202: 65 subjects; and placebo: 36) with a noninterventional extension to 12 months (DPN 3-1b). VM202 or placebo was administered to calf muscles on days 0 and 14, and on days 90 and 104. The primary end point in DPN 3-1 was change from baseline in the mean 24-h Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) pain score. In DPN 3-1b, the primary end point was safety, whereas the secondary efficacy end point was change in the mean pain score. VM202 was well-tolerated in both studies without significant adverse events. VM202 failed to meet its efficacy end points in DPN 3-1. In DPN 3-1b, however, VM202 showed significant and clinically meaningful pain reduction versus placebo. Pain reduction in DPN 3-1b was even greater in subjects not receiving gabapentin or pregabalin, confirming an observation noted in the phase II study. In DPN 3-1b, symptomatic relief was maintained for 8 months after the last injection suggesting that VM202 treatment might change disease progression. Despite the perplexing discrepancy between the two studies, the safety and long-lasting pain-relieving effects of VM202 observed in DPN 3-1b warrant another rigorous phase III study. Study Highlights WHAT IS THE CURRENT KNOWLEDGE ON THE TOPIC? Current therapies for painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) are palliative and do not target the underlying mechanisms. Moreover, symptomatic relief is often limited with existing neuropathic pain drugs. Thus, there is a great medical need for safer and effective treatments for DPN. WHAT QUESTION DID THIS STUDY ADDRESS? Can nonviral gene delivery of hepatocyte growth factor reduce pain in patients with DPN and potentially modify progression of the disorder? WHAT DOES THIS STUDY ADD TO OUR KNOWLEDGE? Nonviral gene therapy can be used safely and practically to treat DPN. HOW MIGHT THIS CHANGE CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY OR TRANSLATIONAL SCIENCE? As the first gene medicine to enter advanced clinical trials for the treatment of DPN, this study provides the proof of concept of an entirely new potential approach to the disorder.
Topics: Aged; Diabetic Neuropathies; Double-Blind Method; Female; Genetic Therapy; Hepatocyte Growth Factor; Humans; Injections, Intramuscular; Male; Middle Aged; Neuralgia; Pain Measurement; Placebos; Plasmids; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33465273
DOI: 10.1111/cts.12977 -
Journal of Nutritional Science and... 2019Tryptophan (TRP), a precursor of serotonin is believed to have an antidepressant effect. The pathway for brain uptake of TRP is shared by other large neutral amino... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
Effect of Tryptophan, Vitamin B, and Nicotinamide-Containing Supplement Loading between Meals on Mood and Autonomic Nervous System Activity in Young Adults with Subclinical Depression: A Randomized, Double-Blind, and Placebo-Controlled Study.
Tryptophan (TRP), a precursor of serotonin is believed to have an antidepressant effect. The pathway for brain uptake of TRP is shared by other large neutral amino acids; therefore, the best time to take TRP may be between meals. No previous study has, however, designated the time of TRP dosing to improve mood. Further, the effects of TRP on autonomic nervous system (ANS) activity are unclear. This study investigated the effects of TRP, vitamin B, and nicotinamide-containing supplements loading between meals on mood and ANS activity in depressive young adults. Thirty depressive young adults were randomly allocated to receive TRP, vitamin B, and nicotinamide-containing supplements or a placebo supplements twice daily between meals for 7 d. Mood was measured using the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) and the Profile of Mood States (POMS). ANS activities were analyzed by heart rate variability power spectral analysis. Blood samples were assayed for plasma total TRP concentration. For analysis, TRP and placebo groups were further classified into two subgroups according to CES-D score (mild to moderate vs. severe depressive symptoms). The CES-D score significantly improved following both treatments in the severe depression subgroups, while the POMS depression score was significantly improved only in the TRP severe depression subgroup. There was no significant change in ANS activity or plasma total TRP in any group. TRP, vitamin B, and nicotinamide-containing supplements loading between meals can quickly improve depressed mood in quite low dose in young adults with severe subclinical depression.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Affect; Depression; Dietary Supplements; Double-Blind Method; Female; Heart Rate; Humans; Male; Niacinamide; Placebos; Tryptophan; Vitamin B 6; Young Adult
PubMed: 31902864
DOI: 10.3177/jnsv.65.507 -
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology... Mar 2020The ACTIVE study demonstrated the antifracture efficacy of abaloparatide in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. ACTIVExtend demonstrated sustained fracture risk... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Randomized Controlled Trial
CONTEXT
The ACTIVE study demonstrated the antifracture efficacy of abaloparatide in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. ACTIVExtend demonstrated sustained fracture risk reduction with alendronate in abaloparatide-treated participants from ACTIVE. A direct comparison of the efficacy of abaloparatide and antiresorptive therapies has not been performed.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this analysis is to compare the antifracture efficacy of abaloparatide in ACTIVE with that of alendronate in ACTIVExtend.
DESIGN
In this post hoc analysis, the rate of new vertebral fractures for women in ACTIVExtend (N = 1139) was calculated based on baseline and endpoint radiographs for placebo or abaloparatide in ACTIVE and alendronate in ACTIVExtend. Vertebral fracture rates between abaloparatide and alendronate were compared in a Poisson regression model. Fracture rates for nonvertebral and clinical fractures were compared based on a Poisson model during 18 months of abaloparatide or placebo treatment in ACTIVE and 18 months of alendronate treatment in ACTIVExtend.
RESULTS
The vertebral fracture rate was lower during abaloparatide treatment in ACTIVE (0.47 fractures/100 patient-years) than alendronate treatment in ACTIVExtend (1.66 fractures/100 patient-years) (relative risk reduction 71%; P = .027). Although the comparisons did not meet statistical significance, after switching from placebo (ACTIVE) to alendronate (ACTIVExtend), the rate of new vertebral fractures decreased from 2.49 to 1.66 fractures per 100 patient-years, and after switching from abaloparatide to alendronate from 0.47 to 0.19 fractures per 100 patient-years. The rates of nonvertebral fractures and clinical fractures were not significantly different.
CONCLUSION
Initial treatment with abaloparatide may result in greater vertebral fracture reduction compared with alendronate in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.
Topics: Aged; Alendronate; Bone Density; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Femur Neck; Humans; Lumbar Vertebrae; Middle Aged; Osteoporosis, Postmenopausal; Osteoporotic Fractures; Parathyroid Hormone-Related Protein; Placebos; Radiography; Risk Factors; Spinal Fractures; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31674644
DOI: 10.1210/clinem/dgz162