-
Scientific Reports Oct 2016Considered an antidepressant and anti-anxiety agent, Hypericum perforatum affects multiple neurotransmitters in a non-competitive synergistic manner, and may have... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Considered an antidepressant and anti-anxiety agent, Hypericum perforatum affects multiple neurotransmitters in a non-competitive synergistic manner, and may have nootropic potential. We quantitatively reviewed the pre-clinical literature to examine if there is a cognitive-enhancing effect of H. perforatum in healthy rodents. Additionally, within these studies, we compared the effects observed in intact rodents versus those whose performance has been impaired, mostly through stress manipulations. The meta-analysis incorporated studies that examined the effect of H. perforatum versus placebo on memory indices of task performance. All analyses were based on weighting different studies according to their inverse variance. Thirteen independent studies (published 2000-2014) involving 20 experimental comparisons met our inclusion criteria. The results showed a large positive effect of H. perforatum on cognitive performance for intact, healthy rodents (d = 1.11), though a larger effect emerged for stress-impaired rodents (d = 3.10 for restraint stress). The positive effect on intact rodents was observed in tasks assessing reference memory as well as working memory, and was not moderated by the type of memory or motivation (appetitive versus aversive). Thus, while primarily considered as a medication for depression, H. perforatum shows considerable nootropic potential in rodents.
Topics: Animals; Hypericum; Memory; Nootropic Agents; Placebos; Rodentia
PubMed: 27762349
DOI: 10.1038/srep35700 -
AIDS (London, England) Sep 2018Low-dose hydrocortisone (LDH) enhances aspects of learning and memory in select populations including patients with posttraumatic stress disorder and HIV-infected men.... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
OBJECTIVE
Low-dose hydrocortisone (LDH) enhances aspects of learning and memory in select populations including patients with posttraumatic stress disorder and HIV-infected men. HIV-infected women show impairments in learning and memory, but the cognitive effects of LDH in HIV-infected women are unknown.
DESIGN
Double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over study examining the time-dependent effects of a single low-dose administration of hydrocortisone (10 mg oral) on cognition in 36 HIV-infected women. Participants were first randomized to LDH or placebo and then received the opposite treatment one month later.
METHODS
Cognitive performance was assessed 30 min and 4 h after pill administration to assess, respectively, nongenomic and genomic effects. Self-reported stress/anxiety and salivary cortisol were assessed throughout sessions.
RESULTS
LDH significantly increased salivary cortisol levels versus placebo; levels returned to baseline 4-h postadministration. At the 30-min assessment, LDH enhanced verbal learning and delayed memory, working memory, behavioral inhibition, and visuospatial abilities. At the 4-h assessment, LDH enhanced verbal learning and delayed memory compared with placebo. LDH-induced cognitive benefits related to reductions in cytokines and to a lesser extent to increases in cortisol.
CONCLUSION
The extended benefits from 30 min to 4 h of a single administration of LDH on learning and delayed memory suggest that targeting the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis may have potential clinical utility in HIV-infected women. These findings contrast with our findings in HIV-infected men who showed improved learning only at the 30-min assessment. Larger, longer term studies are underway to verify possible cognitive enhancing effects of LDH and the clinical significance of these effects in HIV.
Topics: AIDS Dementia Complex; Adolescent; Adult; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Cross-Over Studies; Double-Blind Method; Female; HIV Infections; Humans; Hydrocortisone; Learning; Memory; Middle Aged; Neuropsychological Tests; Placebos; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
PubMed: 29912061
DOI: 10.1097/QAD.0000000000001930 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2018Panic disorder is characterised by repeated, unexpected panic attacks, which represent a discrete period of fear or anxiety that has a rapid onset, reaches a peak within... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Panic disorder is characterised by repeated, unexpected panic attacks, which represent a discrete period of fear or anxiety that has a rapid onset, reaches a peak within 10 minutes, and in which at least four of 13 characteristic symptoms are experienced, including racing heart, chest pain, sweating, shaking, dizziness, flushing, stomach churning, faintness and breathlessness. It is common in the general population with a lifetime prevalence of 1% to 4%. The treatment of panic disorder includes psychological and pharmacological interventions. Amongst pharmacological agents, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and the British Association for Psychopharmacology consider antidepressants, mainly selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), as the first-line treatment for panic disorder, due to their more favourable adverse effect profile over monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs) and tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs). Several classes of antidepressants have been studied and compared, but it is still unclear which antidepressants have a more or less favourable profile in terms of effectiveness and acceptability in the treatment of this condition.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of antidepressants for panic disorder in adults, specifically:1. to determine the efficacy of antidepressants in alleviating symptoms of panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia, in comparison to placebo;2. to review the acceptability of antidepressants in panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia, in comparison with placebo; and3. to investigate the adverse effects of antidepressants in panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia, including the general prevalence of adverse effects, compared to placebo.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders' (CCMD) Specialised Register, and CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO up to May 2017. We handsearched reference lists of relevant papers and previous systematic reviews.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All double-blind, randomised, controlled trials (RCTs) allocating adults with panic disorder to antidepressants or placebo.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently checked eligibility and extracted data using a standard form. We entered data into Review Manager 5 using a double-check procedure. Information extracted included study characteristics, participant characteristics, intervention details and settings. Primary outcomes included failure to respond, measured by a range of response scales, and treatment acceptability, measured by total number of dropouts for any reason. Secondary outcomes included failure to remit, panic symptom scales, frequency of panic attacks, agoraphobia, general anxiety, depression, social functioning, quality of life and patient satisfaction, measured by various scales as defined in individual studies. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence for each outcome MAIN RESULTS: Forty-one unique RCTs including 9377 participants overall, of whom we included 8252 in the 49 placebo-controlled arms of interest (antidepressant as monotherapy and placebo alone) in this review. The majority of studies were of moderate to low quality due to inconsistency, imprecision and unclear risk of selection and performance bias.We found low-quality evidence that revealed a benefit for antidepressants as a group in comparison with placebo in terms of efficacy measured as failure to respond (risk ratio (RR) 0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66 to 0.79; participants = 6500; studies = 30). The magnitude of effect corresponds to a number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) of 7 (95% CI 6 to 9): that means seven people would need to be treated with antidepressants in order for one to benefit. We observed the same finding when classes of antidepressants were compared with placebo.Moderate-quality evidence suggested a benefit for antidepressants compared to placebo when looking at number of dropouts due to any cause (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.97; participants = 7850; studies = 30). The magnitude of effect corresponds to a NNTB of 27 (95% CI 17 to 105); treating 27 people will result in one person fewer dropping out. Considering antidepressant classes, TCAs showed a benefit over placebo, while for SSRIs and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRIs) we observed no difference.When looking at dropouts due to adverse effects, which can be considered as a measure of tolerability, we found moderate-quality evidence showing that antidepressants as a whole are less well tolerated than placebo. In particular, TCAs and SSRIs produced more dropouts due to adverse effects in comparison with placebo, while the confidence interval for SNRI, noradrenergic reuptake inhibitors (NRI) and other antidepressants were wide and included the possibility of no difference.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The identified studies comprehensively address the objectives of the present review.Based on these results, antidepressants may be more effective than placebo in treating panic disorder. Efficacy can be quantified as a NNTB of 7, implying that seven people need to be treated with antidepressants in order for one to benefit. Antidepressants may also have benefit in comparison with placebo in terms of number of dropouts, but a less favourable profile in terms of dropout due to adverse effects. However, the tolerability profile varied between different classes of antidepressants.The choice of whether antidepressants should be prescribed in clinical practice cannot be made on the basis of this review.Limitations in results include funding of some studies by pharmaceutical companies, and only assessing short-term outcomes.Data from the present review will be included in a network meta-analysis of psychopharmacological treatment in panic disorder, which will hopefully provide further useful information on this issue.
Topics: Adult; Agoraphobia; Antidepressive Agents; Humans; Numbers Needed To Treat; Panic Disorder; Patient Dropouts; Placebos; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Failure
PubMed: 29620793
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010676.pub2 -
JAMA Psychiatry Jan 2022Single-blind placebo run-in (PRI) periods are common in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of treatment for depression. They aim to increase sensitivity to detect drug... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Single-blind placebo run-in (PRI) periods are common in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of treatment for depression. They aim to increase sensitivity to detect drug effects; however, the association of PRI periods with study outcomes remains unclear. This is concerning given the costs of PRI periods to patients and investigators.
OBJECTIVE
To examine the association of the use of PRI periods with the placebo response, drug response, and drug-placebo difference among RCTs of antidepressants.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and PsycINFO, as well as repositories of unpublished studies, were systematically searched up to July 2021.
STUDY SELECTION
Included studies were double-blind, placebo-controlled RCTs of antidepressant medication among adults with depressive disorders.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Data were extracted into a coding sheet, including the characteristics of studies, the characteristics of PRI periods, and the outcomes of studies.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Study outcomes were the primary depression symptom measure reported by the RCT. These outcomes were used to calculate effect sizes (Hedges g) of the within-group drug response and placebo response as well as the drug-placebo difference. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to calculate effect sizes, and subgroup analyses were used to compare outcomes depending on use of PRI periods.
RESULTS
A total of 347 trials (representing 89 183 participants) were included; 174 studies (50%) reported using a single-blind PRI period. Response outcome data were available for 189 studies. Studies using PRI periods reported a smaller placebo response (g = 1.05 [95% CI, 0.98-1.11]; I2 = 82%) than studies that did not use a PRI period (g = 1.15 [95% CI, 1.09-1.21]; I2 = 81%; P = .02). Subgroup analysis showed a larger drug response size among studies that did not use a PRI period (g = 1.55 [95% CI, 1.49-1.61]; I2 = 85%) than those that did use a PRI period (g = 1.42 [95% CI, 1.36-1.48]; I2 = 81%; P = .001). The drug-placebo difference did not differ by use of PRI periods (g = 0.33 [95% CI, 0.29-0.38]; I2 = 47% for use of a PRI period vs g = 0.34 [95% CI, 0.30-0.38]; I2 = 54% for no use of PRI periods; P = .92). The likelihood of response to drug vs placebo also did not differ between studies that used a PRI period (odds ratio, 1.89 [95% CI, 1.76-2.03]) and those that did not use a PRI period (odds ratio, 1.77 [95% CI, 1.65-1.89]; P = .18).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
This study suggests that RCTs using PRI periods yield smaller within-group changes across both placebo and drug groups compared with RCTs without PRI periods. The reduction in effect size across groups was equivalent in magnitude. Consequently, PRI studies do not observe larger drug-placebo differences, suggesting that they do not increase trial sensitivity. As such, given the resources and probable deception required and risk to external validity, the practice of using PRI periods in RCTs of antidepressants should be ended.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; Humans; Placebos; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Single-Blind Method
PubMed: 34757405
DOI: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2021.3204 -
American Journal of Clinical Dermatology Jan 2021Conjunctivitis is a known comorbidity of atopic dermatitis. Dupilumab clinical trials for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis in adults showed a higher conjunctivitis...
BACKGROUND
Conjunctivitis is a known comorbidity of atopic dermatitis. Dupilumab clinical trials for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis in adults showed a higher conjunctivitis incidence for dupilumab-treated patients than placebo-treated patients, whereas trials for uncontrolled asthma reported lower rates for both dupilumab and placebo.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this study was to evaluate the incidence and severity of conjunctivitis in dupilumab clinical trials in adolescents with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis or uncontrolled asthma.
METHODS
We evaluated the incidence of conjunctivitis in adolescents (aged 12 to < 18 years) in three phase III trials. Ocular events were diagnosed and treated based on patient-reported symptoms and an external eye examination by study investigators, in most cases without an ophthalmologic referral. In LIBERTY AD ADOL (16-week, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded trial), adolescents with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis were randomized to subcutaneous placebo, dupilumab 300 mg every 4 weeks, or dupilumab every 2 weeks (200 mg, patients < 60 kg at baseline; 300 mg, ≥ 60 kg at baseline). In LIBERTY AD PED-OLE (open-label extension), pediatric patients from previous dupilumab atopic dermatitis trials received dupilumab 2 mg/kg or 4 mg/kg weekly (up to 300 mg) or 300 mg every 4 weeks. In LIBERTY ASTHMA QUEST (randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial), patients with uncontrolled moderate-to-severe asthma were randomized to 52 weeks of add-on therapy with dupilumab 200 or 300 mg every 2 weeks or matched-volume placebo.
RESULTS
In ADOL, more dupilumab-treated (17/165; 10.3%) than placebo-treated patients (4/85; 4.7%) reported one or more conjunctivitis event. All events were mild to moderate in severity; 12 (7.3%) dupilumab-treated and 4 (4.7%) placebo-treated patients received treatment. Most patients with conjunctivitis (dupilumab, 12/17; placebo, 4/4) recovered/resolved during the treatment period. The risk of conjunctivitis showed no relationship with dupilumab serum concentration. In PED-OLE, 12/275 adolescents (4.4%) reported one or more conjunctivitis event. Most conjunctivitis events were mild to moderate. Ten patients received treatment for conjunctivitis. Ten patients recovered/resolved during the study. In QUEST, similar low proportions of dupilumab-treated (2/68, 2.9%) and placebo-treated (1/39, 2.6%) adolescents reported one or more conjunctivitis event. All events were mild to moderate. One dupilumab-treated patient received treatment for conjunctivitis. All cases recovered/resolved during the study. No patients in these trials discontinued study treatment temporarily or permanently because of conjunctivitis. In ADOL, one case of unspecified viral keratitis (specific viral etiology not known) in the dupilumab 300-mg every 4 weeks group and one case of allergic blepharitis in the placebo group were reported; both events resolved during the treatment period, and neither led to treatment discontinuation.
CONCLUSIONS
Dupilumab-treated adolescents in atopic dermatitis trials had a higher incidence of conjunctivitis than placebo-treated patients, whereas overall rates of conjunctivitis among adolescents in the asthma trial were lower than in atopic dermatitis trials and were similar for dupilumab- and placebo-treated patients. Most events were mild to moderate, most recovered/resolved, and none prompted study withdrawal. These results are similar to those reported in adult trials and support a drug-disease interaction. CLINICALTRIALS.
GOV IDENTIFIERS
NCT03054428, NCT02612454, NCT02414854. Conjunctivitis in Dupilumab Clinical Trials for Adolescents with Atopic Dermatitis or Asthma (MP4 18453 kb).
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Age Factors; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Asthma; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Conjunctivitis; Dermatitis, Atopic; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Drug Administration Schedule; Female; Humans; Incidence; Injections, Subcutaneous; Male; Placebos; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Severity of Illness Index; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33481203
DOI: 10.1007/s40257-020-00577-1 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2017People with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have poor quality of life, reduced survival, and accelerated decline in lung function, especially associated... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
People with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have poor quality of life, reduced survival, and accelerated decline in lung function, especially associated with acute exacerbations, leading to high healthcare costs. Long-acting bronchodilators are the mainstay of treatment for symptomatic improvement, and umeclidinium is one of the new long-acting muscarinic antagonists approved for treatment of patients with stable COPD.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and safety of umeclidinium bromide versus placebo for people with stable COPD.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register (CAGR), ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization (WHO) trials portal, and the GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) Clinical Study Register, using prespecified terms, as well as the reference lists of all identified studies. Searches are current to April 2017.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of parallel design comparing umeclidinium bromide versus placebo in people with COPD, for at least 12 weeks.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. If we noted significant heterogeneity in the meta-analyses, we subgrouped studies by umeclidinium dose.
MAIN RESULTS
We included four studies of 12 to 52 weeks' duration, involving 3798 participants with COPD. Mean age of participants ranged from 60.1 to 64.6 years; most were males with baseline mean smoking pack-years of 39.2 to 52.3. They had moderate to severe COPD and baseline mean post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV) ranging from 44.5% to 55.1% of predicted normal. As all studies were systematically conducted according to prespecified protocols, we assessed risk of selection, performance, detection, attrition, and reporting biases as low.Compared with those given placebo, participants in the umeclidinium group had a lesser likelihood of developing moderate exacerbations requiring a short course of steroids, antibiotics, or both (odds ratio (OR) 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46 to 0.80; four studies, N = 1922; GRADE: high), but not specifically requiring hospitalisations due to severe exacerbations (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.25 to 2.92; four studies, N = 1922, GRADE: low). The number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) to prevent an acute exacerbation requiring steroids, antibiotics, or both was 18 (95% CI 13 to 37). Quality of life was better in the umeclidinium group (mean difference (MD) -4.79, 95% CI -8.84 to -0.75; three studies, N = 1119), and these participants had a significantly higher chance of achieving a minimal clinically important difference of at least four units in St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score compared with those in the placebo group (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.82; three studies, N = 1397; GRADE: moderate). The NNTB to achieve one person with a clinically meaningful improvement was 11 (95% CI 7 to 29). The likelihood of all-cause mortality, non-fatal serious adverse events (OR 1.33; 95% CI 0.89 to 2.00; four studies, N = 1922, GRADE: moderate), and adverse events (OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.31; four studies, N = 1922; GRADE: moderate) did not differ between umeclidinium and placebo groups. The umeclidinium group demonstrated significantly greater improvement in change from baseline in trough FEV compared with the placebo group (MD 0.14, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.17; four studies, N = 1381; GRADE: high). Symptomatic improvement was more likely in the umeclidinium group than in the placebo group, as determined by Transitional Dyspnoea Index (TDI) focal score (MD 0.76, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.09; three studies, N = 1193), and the chance of achieving a minimal clinically important difference of at least one unit improvement was significantly higher with umeclidinium than with placebo (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.37 to 2.15; three studies, N = 1141; GRADE: high). The NNTB to attain one person with clinically important symptomatic improvement was 8 (95% CI 5 to 14). The likelihood of rescue medication usage (change from baseline in the number of puffs per day) was significantly less for the umeclidinium group than for the placebo group (MD -0.45, 95% CI -0.76 to -0.14; four studies, N = 1531).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Umeclidinium reduced acute exacerbations requiring steroids, antibiotics, or both, although no evidence suggests that it decreased the risk of hospital admission due to exacerbations. Moreover, umeclidinium demonstrated significant improvement in quality of life, lung function, and symptoms, along with lesser use of rescue medications. Studies reported no differences in adverse events, non-fatal serious adverse events, or mortality between umeclidinium and placebo groups; however, larger studies would yield a more precise estimate for these outcomes.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Bromides; Disease Progression; Female; Forced Expiratory Volume; Hospitalization; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Numbers Needed To Treat; Placebos; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Quality of Life; Quinuclidines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Smoking; Steroids
PubMed: 28631387
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011897.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2015This review has been withdrawn due to non‐compliance with Cochrane's Commercial Sponsorship Policy. The editorial group responsible for this previously published... (Review)
Review
This review has been withdrawn due to non‐compliance with Cochrane's Commercial Sponsorship Policy. The editorial group responsible for this previously published document have withdrawn it from publication.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; Dysthymic Disorder; Humans; Placebos; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 26087170
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001130.pub2 -
Pediatric Research Jan 2022To assess the potential impact of azithromycin treatment in the first week following birth on 2-year outcomes in preterm infants with and without Ureaplasma respiratory... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
To assess the potential impact of azithromycin treatment in the first week following birth on 2-year outcomes in preterm infants with and without Ureaplasma respiratory colonization who participated in a double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized controlled trial.
METHODS
Respiratory morbidity was assessed at NICU discharge and at 6, 12, and 22-26 months corrected age using pulmonary questionnaires. Comprehensive neurodevelopmental assessments were completed between 22 and 26 months corrected age. The primary and secondary composite outcomes were death or severe respiratory morbidity and death or moderate-severe neurodevelopmental impairment, respectively, at 22-26 months corrected age.
RESULTS
One hundred and twenty-one randomized participants (azithromycin, N = 60; placebo, N = 61) were included in the intent-to-treat analysis. There were no significant differences in death or serious respiratory morbidity (34.8 vs 30.4%, p = 0.67) or death or moderate-severe neurodevelopmental impairment (47 vs 33%, p = 0.11) between the azithromycin and placebo groups. Among all trial participants, tracheal aspirate Ureaplasma-positive infants experienced a higher frequency of death or serious respiratory morbidity at 22-26 months corrected age (58%) than tracheal aspirate Ureaplasma-negative infants (34%) or non-intubated infants (21%) (p = 0.028).
CONCLUSIONS
We did not observe strong evidence of a difference in long-term pulmonary and neurodevelopment outcomes in preterm infants treated with azithromycin in the first week of life compared to placebo.
IMPACT
No strong evidence of a difference in long-term pulmonary and neurodevelopment outcomes was identified at 22-26 months corrected age in infants treated with azithromycin in the first week of life compared to placebo. The RCT is the first study of 2-year pulmonary and neurodevelopmental outcomes of azithromycin treatment in ELGANs. Provides evidence that ELGANs with lower respiratory tract Ureaplasma have the most frequent serious respiratory morbidity in the first 2 years of life, suggesting that a Phase III trial of azithromycin to prevent BPD targeting this population is warranted.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Azithromycin; Double-Blind Method; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Premature; Lung; Placebos; Ureaplasma Infections
PubMed: 33658655
DOI: 10.1038/s41390-021-01437-2 -
CPT: Pharmacometrics & Systems... Apr 2021This study tested the hypothesis that analyzing longitudinal item scores of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale could allow a smaller trial size and describe a... (Clinical Trial)
Clinical Trial
This study tested the hypothesis that analyzing longitudinal item scores of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale could allow a smaller trial size and describe a drug's effect on symptom progression. Two historical studies of the dopaminergic drug ropinirole were analyzed: a cross-over formulation comparison trial in 161 patients with early-stage Parkinson's disease, and a 24-week, parallel-group, placebo-controlled efficacy trial in 393 patients with advanced-stage Parkinson's disease. We applied item response theory to estimate the patients' symptom severity and developed a longitudinal model using the symptom severity to describe the time course of the placebo response and the drug effect on the time course. Similarly, we developed a longitudinal model using the total score. We then compared sample size needs for drug effect detection using these two different models. Total score modeling estimated median changes from baseline at 24 weeks (90% confidence interval) of -3.7 (-5.4 to -2.0) and -9.3 (-11 to -7.3) points by placebo and ropinirole. Comparable changes were estimated (with slightly higher precision) by item-score modeling as -2.0 (-4.0 to -1.0) and -9.0 (-11 to -8.0) points. The treatment duration was insufficient to estimate the symptom progression rate; hence the drug effect on the progression could not be assessed. The trial sizes to detect a drug effect with 80% power on total score and on symptom severity were estimated (at the type I error level of 0.05) as 88 and 58, respectively. Longitudinal item response analysis could markedly reduce sample size; it also has the potential for assessing drug effects on disease progression in longer trials.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Case-Control Studies; Cross-Over Studies; Dopamine Agonists; Drug Development; Female; Humans; Indoles; Longitudinal Studies; Male; Mental Status and Dementia Tests; Middle Aged; Parkinson Disease; Placebos; Severity of Illness Index
PubMed: 33951753
DOI: 10.1002/psp4.12601 -
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy Oct 2017Finafloxacin is a novel fluoroquinolone exhibiting enhanced activity under acidic conditions and a broad-spectrum antibacterial profile. The present study assessed the... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
Finafloxacin is a novel fluoroquinolone exhibiting enhanced activity under acidic conditions and a broad-spectrum antibacterial profile. The present study assessed the pharmacokinetic properties and the safety and tolerability of finafloxacin following intravenous infusions. In this mixed-parallel-group, crossover study, healthy male and female volunteers received single ascending doses (18 volunteers, 200 to 1,000 mg) or multiple ascending doses (40 volunteers, 600 to 1,000 mg) of finafloxacin or placebo. Plasma and urine samples were collected by a dense sampling scheme to determine the pharmacokinetics of finafloxacin using a noncompartmental approach. Standard safety and tolerability data were documented. Finafloxacin had a volume of distribution of 90 to 127 liters (range) at steady state and 446 to 550 liters at pseudoequilibrium, indicating the elimination of a large fraction before pseudoequilibrium was reached. Areas under the concentration-time curves and maximum plasma concentrations (geometric means) increased slightly more than proportionally (6.73 to 45.9 μg · h/ml and 2.56 to 20.2 μg/ml, respectively), the terminal elimination half-life increased (10.6 to 17.1 h), and the urinary recovery decreased (44.2% to 31.7%) with increasing finafloxacin doses (single doses of 200 to 1,000 mg). The pharmacokinetic profiles suggested multiphasic elimination by both glomerular filtration and saturable tubular secretion. The values of the parameters were similar for single and multiple administrations. The coefficient of variation for the between-subject variability of exposure ranged from 10% (≤600 mg) to 38% (>600 mg). Adverse events were mild and nonspecific, with no dependence of adverse events on dose or treatment (including placebo) being detected. Despite a relatively high interindividual variability at higher doses, the level of exposure following intravenous administration of finafloxacin appears to be predictable. Individual elimination processes should be evaluated in more detail. Finafloxacin exhibited a favorable safety and tolerability profile. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under registration no. NCT01910883.).
Topics: Administration, Intravenous; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Double-Blind Method; Female; Fluoroquinolones; Healthy Volunteers; Humans; Male; Placebos
PubMed: 28784673
DOI: 10.1128/AAC.01122-17