scholarly journals Clinical Efficacy and Safety Profile of Anterior Thalamic Stimulation for Intractable Epilepsy

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michał Sobstyl ◽  
Angelika Stapińska-Syniec ◽  
Szczepan Iwański ◽  
Marcin Rylski
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Clinical Efficacy ◽  
Safety Profile ◽  
Intractable Epilepsy ◽  
Brain Regions ◽  
Partial Seizures ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Stimulation Parameters ◽  
Number Of Patients

Abstract Introduction Deep brain stimulation of the anterior nucleus of the thalamus (ANT DBS) is a neuromodulation therapy for patients with refractory partial seizures. The ANT is the structure of a limbic system with abundant neuronal connections to temporal and frontal brain regions that participate in seizure propagation circuitry. State of the Art We have performed a literature search regarding the clinical efficacy of ANT DBS. We discuss the surgical technique of the implantation of DBS electrodes with special attention paid to the targeting methods of the ANT. Moreover, we present in detail the clinical efficacy of ANT DBS, with a special emphasis on the stimulation parameters, a stimulation mode, and polarity. We also report all adverse events and present the current limitations of ANT DBS. Clinical Implications In general, the safety profile of DBS in intractable epilepsy patients is good, with a low rate of surgery, hardware-related, and stimulation-induced adverse events. No significant cognitive declines or worsening of depressive symptoms was noted. At long-term follow-up, the quality-of-life scores have improved. The limitations of ANT DBS studies include a limited number of patients treated and mostly open-label designs with only one double-blind, randomized multicenter trial. Most studies do not report the etiology of intractable epilepsy or they include nonhomogeneous groups of patients affected by intractable epilepsy. There are no guidelines for setting initial stimulation parameters. All the variables mentioned may have a profound impact on the final outcome. Conclusions ANT DBS appears to be a safe and efficacious treatment, particularly in patients with refractory partial seizures (three-quarters of patients gained at least 50% seizure reduction after 5 years). ANT DBS reduces most effectively the seizures originating in the temporal and frontal lobes. The published results of ANT DBS highlight promise and hope for patients with intractable epilepsy.

Long-term cariprazine treatment for the prevention of relapse in patients with schizophrenia: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

2020 ◽  
pp. 27-37
Author(s):  
Suresh Durgam ◽  
Willie Earley ◽  
Rui Li ◽  
Dayong Li ◽  
Kaifeng Lu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Safety Profile ◽  
Relapse Prevention ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Fixed Dose ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Double Blind Placebo ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Time To Relapse

Cariprazine, a dopamine D3/D2 receptor partial agonist with preference for D3 receptors, has demonstrated efficacy in randomized controlled trials in schizophrenia. This multinational, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study evaluated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of cariprazine for relapse prevention in adults with schizophrenia; total study duration was up to 97 weeks. Schizophrenia symptoms were treated/stabilized with cariprazine 3—9 mg/d during 20-week open-label treatment consisting of an 8-week, flexible-dose run-in phase and a 12-week fixed-dose stabilization phase. Stable patients who completed open-label treatment could be randomized to continued cariprazine (3, 6, or 9 mg/d) or placebo for double-blind treatment (up to 72 weeks). The primary efficacy parameter was time to relapse (worsening of symptom scores, psychiatric hospitalization, aggressive/violent behavior, or suicidal risk); clinical measures were implemented to ensure safety in case of impending relapse. A total of 264/765 patients completed open-label treatment; 200 eligible patients were randomized to double-blind placebo (n = 99) or cariprazine (n = 101). Time to relapse was significantly longer in cariprazine — versus placebo-treated patients (P = .0010, log-rank test). Relapse occurred in 24.8% of cariprazine- and 47.5% of placebo-treated patients (hazard ratio [95% CI] = 0.45 [0.28, 0.73]). Akathisia (19.2%), insomnia (14.4%), and headache (12.0%) were reported in ≥ 10% of patients during open-label treatment; there were no cariprazine adverse events ≥ 10% during double-blind treatment. Long-term cariprazine treatment was significantly more effective than placebo for relapse prevention in patients with schizophrenia. The long-term safety profile in this study was consistent with the safety profile observed in previous cariprazine clinical trials. ClincalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01412060. Key words: schizophrenia; cariprazine; long-term treatment; relapse prevention; randomized controlled trial; oral antipsychotics

Topical oxygen therapy in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers: a multicentre, open, randomised controlled clinical trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (Sup5) ◽  
pp. S7-S14
Author(s):  
Thomas E Serena ◽  
Neal M Bullock ◽  
Windy Cole ◽  
John Lantis ◽  
Lam Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Diabetic Foot ◽  
Oxygen Therapy ◽  
Wound Closure ◽  
Foot Ulcers ◽  
Controlled Clinical Trial ◽  
Diabetic Foot Ulcers ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Number Of Patients

Objectives: Perfusion and blood oxygen levels are frequently insufficient in patients with hard-to-heal wounds due to poor circulation, vascular disruption and vasoconstriction, reducing the wound's capacity to heal. This study aimed to investigate the effect of topical oxygen on healing rates in patients with hard-to-heal diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) (i.e., non-responsive over four weeks). Method: This multicentre, open-label, community-based randomised clinical trial compared standard care (SOC) with or without continuous topical oxygen therapy (TOT) for 12 weeks in patients with DFUs or minor amputation wounds. SOC included debridement, offloading with total contact casting (TCC) and appropriate moisture balance. Primary endpoints were the number of patients to achieve complete wound closure and percentage change in ulcer size. Secondary endpoints were pain levels and adverse events. Results: For the study, 145 patients were randomised with index ulcers graded Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) 1 or 2, or Wagner 1 or 2. In the intention-to-treat analysis, 18/64 (28.1%) patients healed in the SOC group at 12 weeks compared with 36/81 (44.4%) in the SOC plus TOT group (p=0.044). There was a statistically significant reduction in wound area between the groups: SOC group mean reduction: 40% (standard deviation (SD) 72.1); SOC plus TOT group mean reduction: 70% (SD 45.5); per protocol p=0.005). There were no significant differences in changes to pain levels or adverse events. Conclusion: This study suggests that the addition of TOT to SOC facilitates wound closure in patients with hard-to-heal DFUs.

scholarly journals An Overview on the Ongoing Clinical Trials of COVID-19 Vaccines

2020 ◽  
Vol V (I) ◽  
pp. 39-48
Author(s):  
Syeda Komal Fatima ◽  
Ameena Tur Rasool ◽  
Ayesha Sabir ◽  
Gul Shahnaz
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Antimicrobial Resistance ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Clinical Efficacy ◽  
Safety Profile ◽  
Clinical Endpoint ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Research Reporting ◽  
Development Of Resistance ◽  
Global Pandemic

COVID-19 has posed a great threat to mankind, there is a dire need to introduce a vaccine to combat this global pandemic. Several vaccines are underway to complete their phase 3 clinical trials. This article highlights events surrounding the ongoing clinical trials of vaccines effective against COVID-19, and different procedures and formalities the vaccine will have to endure to get EUA. Clinical trials are discussed stepwise along with the clinical endpoint desired at the end of these trials. In line with antimicrobial resistance, vaccine resistance has also emerged in this era and needs focused consideration, and the probability of development of resistance in these vaccines is discussed. This article specifically covers the latest research reporting clinical efficacy, safety profile, and adverse events following the administration of doses to patients and concerns regarding the rushed approval of vaccines. Four vaccines have been discussed in detail; BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, Sputnik V, ChAdOx1.

Modafinil Augmentation for Residual Symptoms of Fatigue in Patients with a Partial Response to Antidepressants

2007 ◽  
Vol 41 (6) ◽  
pp. 1005-1012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jenny Y Lam ◽  
Maisha Kelly Freeman ◽  
Marshall E Cates
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Controlled Clinical Trials ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Residual Symptoms ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Manual Search ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Residual Fatigue

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the literature discussing the use of modafinil in the treatment of residual symptoms of fatigue in patients with depression. DATA SOURCES: PubMed (1966–March 2007) and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts(1970–March 2007) were searched using the key words modafinil and depression. A manual search of the reference section of the articles retrieved was conducted to identify articles not indexed in either of these sources. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: All articles published in English were evaluated. Studies were included if modafinil was used to treat patients with residual fatigue from depression and the effects were measured with validated fatigue subscales. DATA SYNTHESIS: One retrospective study, 5 open-label trials, and 2 randomized controlled clinical trials met the inclusion criteria for assessment of residual symptoms of fatigue as assessed by commonly used fatigue subscales after modafinil administration. Although improvement with fatigue has occurred with modafinil therapy, literature regarding the topic is limited by the lack of well-controlled clinical trials. Modafinil does appear to improve residual fatigue with depression as evidenced by open-label trials; however, the efficacy of this agent has not been duplicated in randomized controlled trials. The open-label trials that have been conducted often had no comparator and a small number of patients. In addition, outcome measures used in the studies were not consistent between trials. Modafinil appears to be well tolerated, with the main adverse effects being headache and nausea. CONCLUSIONS: Open-label trials indicate that modafinil may be effective in ameliorating fatigue associated with depression; however, this effect has not been reproduced in randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials. Therefore, the use of modafinil for the treatment of residual fatigue is not recommended due to the lack of reproducible data of its efficacy. Long-term, adequately powered clinical trials should be conducted to determine its place in therapy.

Analysis of the effect of crossover from placebo (PBO) to darolutamide (DARO) on overall survival (OS) benefit in the ARAMIS Trial.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 240-240
Author(s):  
Neal D. Shore ◽  
Karim Fizazi ◽  
Teuvo Tammela ◽  
Murilo Luz ◽  
Manuel Philco Salas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Effect ◽  
Safety Profile ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Primary Analysis ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
The Impact

240 Background: DARO is a structurally distinct androgen receptor inhibitor approved for the treatment of non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) based on significantly prolonged metastasis-free survival compared with PBO (median 40.4 vs 18.4 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0.41; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.34–0.50; P < 0.0001) and a favorable safety profile in the phase III ARAMIS trial. Following unblinding at the primary analysis, crossover from PBO to DARO was permitted for the subsequent open-label treatment phase. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the effect of PBO–DARO crossover on OS benefit. Methods: Patients (pts) with nmCRPC receiving androgen deprivation therapy were randomized 2:1 to DARO (n = 955) or PBO (n = 554). In addition to OS, secondary endpoints included times to pain progression, first cytotoxic chemotherapy, first symptomatic skeletal event, and safety. The OS analysis was planned to occur after approximately 240 deaths, and secondary endpoints were evaluated in a hierarchical order. Iterative parameter estimation (IPE) and rank-preserving structural failure time (RPSFT) analyses were performed as pre-planned sensitivity analyses to adjust for the treatment effect of PBO–DARO crossover. The IPE method used a parametric model for the survival times and iteratively determined the model parameter describing the magnitude of the treatment effect, whereas a grid search and non-parametric log-rank test were used for the RPSFT analysis. The IPE and RPSFT analyses both generated a Kaplan–Meier curve for the PBO arm that predicts what would have been observed in the absence of PBO–DARO crossover. Results: After unblinding, 170 pts (30.7% of those randomized to PBO) crossed over from PBO to DARO; median treatment duration from unblinding to the final data cut-off was 11 months. Final analysis of the combined double-blind and open label periods was conducted after 254 deaths (15.5% of DARO and 19.1% of PBO pts) and showed a statistically significant OS benefit for DARO vs PBO (HR 0.69; 95% CI 0.53–0.88; P = 0.003). Results from the IPE (HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.51–0.84; P < 0.001) and RPSFT (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.51–0.90; P = 0.007) analyses were similar to those from the intention-to-treat population, showing that the impact of PBO–DARO crossover was small. Additional analyses accounting for the effect of PBO–DARO crossover will be presented. The safety profile of DARO continued to be favorable at the final analysis, and discontinuation rates at the end of the double-blind period remained unchanged from the primary analysis (8.9% with DARO and 8.7% with PBO). Conclusions: Early treatment with DARO in men with nmCRPC is associated with significant improvement in OS regardless of pts crossing over from PBO to DARO. The safety profile of DARO remained favorable at the final analysis. Clinical trial information: NCT02200614.

scholarly journals Safety and effectiveness of lurasidone in adolescents with schizophrenia: results of a 2-year, open-label extension study

CNS Spectrums ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Christoph U. Correll ◽  
Robert L. Findling ◽  
Michael Tocco ◽  
Andrei Pikalov ◽  
Ling Deng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Body Weight ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Rating Scales ◽  
Extension Study ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Syndrome Scale ◽  
Open Label Extension ◽  
Glycemic Indices

Abstract Background Minimal long-term benefit: Risk data are available regarding antipsychotic treatments for schizophrenia in pediatric populations. This study evaluated the long-term safety, tolerability, and effectiveness of lurasidone in adolescents with schizophrenia. Methods Patients aged from 13 to 17 who completed 6 weeks of double-blind (DB), placebo-controlled treatment with lurasidone were enrolled in a 2-year, open-label (OL), flexible dose (20-80 mg/day) lurasidone treatment study. Safety was assessed via spontaneous reporting, rating scales, body weight measurement, metabolic, and prolactin testing. Effectiveness measures included the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score. Results About 271 patients completed 6 weeks of DB treatment and entered the 2-year OL extension study. Altogether, 42.4% discontinued prematurely, 10.7% due to adverse events. During OL treatment, the most common adverse events were headache (24.0%); anxiety (12.9%), schizophrenia, and nausea (12.5%); sedation/somnolence (12.2%); and nasopharyngitis (8.9%). Minimal changes were observed on metabolic parameters and prolactin. Mean change from DB baseline in weight at week 52 and week 104 was +3.3 kg and + 4.9 kg, respectively, compared to an expected weight gain of +3.4 kg and + 5.7 kg, respectively, based on the sex- and age-matched US Center for Disease Control normative data. Continued improvement was observed in PANSS total score, with mean change from OL baseline of −15.6 at week 52 and −18.4 at week 104. Conclusion In adolescents with schizophrenia, long-term lurasidone treatment was associated with minimal effects on body weight, lipids, glycemic indices, and prolactin. Continued improvement in symptoms of schizophrenia was observed over 2 years of lurasidone treatment.

scholarly journals Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Single-Ascending-Dose Study of the Penetration of a Monoclonal Antibody Combination (ASN100) Targeting Staphylococcus aureus Cytotoxins in the Lung Epithelial Lining Fluid of Healthy Volunteers

2019 ◽  
Vol 63 (8) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zoltan Magyarics ◽  
Fraser Leslie ◽  
Johann Bartko ◽  
Harald Rouha ◽  
Steven Luperchio ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Staphylococcus Aureus ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Healthy Volunteers ◽  
Dose Escalation ◽  
Human Study ◽  
Epithelial Lining ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Epithelial Lining Fluid ◽  
Double Blind Placebo

ABSTRACT ASN100 is a novel antibody combination of two fully human IgG1(κ) monoclonal antibodies (MAbs), ASN-1 and ASN-2, which neutralize six Staphylococcus aureus cytotoxins, alpha-hemolysin (Hla) and five bicomponent leukocidins. We assessed the safety, tolerability, and serum and lung pharmacokinetics of ASN100 in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled single-dose-escalation first-in-human study. Fifty-two healthy volunteers were enrolled and randomized to receive either ASN-1, ASN-2, a combination of both MAbs (ASN100), or a corresponding placebo. Thirty-two subjects in the double-blind dose escalation portion of the study received ASN-1 or ASN-2 at a 200-, 600-, 1,800-, or 4,000-mg dose, or placebo. Eight subjects received both MAbs simultaneously in a 1:1 ratio (ASN100) at 3,600 or 8,000 mg, or they received placebos. Twelve additional subjects received open-label ASN100 at 3,600 or 8,000 mg to assess the pharmacokinetics of ASN-1 and ASN-2 in epithelial lining fluid (ELF) by bronchoalveolar lavage fluid sampling. Subjects were monitored for 98 days (double-blind cohorts) or 30 days (open-label cohorts) for safety assessment. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed, and all adverse events were mild and transient, with only two adverse events considered possibly related to the investigational product. ASN100 exhibited linear serum pharmacokinetics with a half-life of approximately 3 weeks and showed detectable penetration into the ELF. No treatment-emergent anti-drug antibody responses were detected. The toxin neutralizing potency of ASN100 in human serum was confirmed up to 58 days postdosing. The favorable safety profile, ELF penetration, and maintained functional activity in serum supported the further clinical development of ASN100.

Efficacy of Phenazone in the Treatment of Acute Migraine Attacks: A Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Randomized Study

Cephalalgia ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 24 (10) ◽  
pp. 888-893 ◽  
Author(s):  
H Göbel ◽  
A Heinze ◽  
U Niederberger ◽  
T Witt ◽  
V Zumbroich
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Acute Migraine ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Double Blind Placebo ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Main Target

In this study we compared the efficacy of 1000 mg phenazone with that of placebo in the treatment of acute migraine attacks in a randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled study of 208 patients. The main target criterion was the number of patients with a pain reduction from severe or moderate to slight or no pain 2 h after taking the pain medication. The percentage of patients satisfying the main target criterion was 48.6% for phenazone and 27.2% ( P < 0.05) for placebo. Freedom from pain after 2 h was reported by 27.6% with phenazone treatment and 13.6% ( P < 0.05) with placebo. Compared with placebo, the phenazone treatment also resulted in a significant improvement in the associated migraine symptoms of nausea, phonophobia and photophobia. Of patients treated with phenazone 11.4%, and 5.8% of those treated with placebo reported adverse events. There was no significant difference between the groups with regard to numbers of patients with adverse events. No serious adverse events occurred. The results show that phenazone at a dosage of 1000 mg is effective and well tolerated in the treatment of acute migraine attacks.

THUR 173 Longterms: 10-year experience of fingolimod in RRMS patients

2018 ◽  
Vol 89 (10) ◽  
pp. A22.3-A22
Author(s):  
Cohen Jeffrey ◽  
Tenenbaum Nadia ◽  
Bhatt Alit ◽  
Pimentel Ron ◽  
Kappos Ludwig
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Safety Profile ◽  
Brain Volume ◽  
Disability Progression ◽  
Open Label ◽  
T2 Lesions ◽  
Long Term Follow Up ◽  
Efficacy Measures

ObjectivesPresent results for up to 10 years of fingolimod treatment in RRMS patients.MethodsLONGTERMS is an open-label, single-arm, extension study evaluating the long-term safety, tolerability and efficacy of fingolimod in patients who previously participated in earlier fingolimod studies. Key efficacy measures: annualised relapse rate (ARR), proportion of patients free of 6 month confirmed disability progression (6 m-CDP), annualised rate of new or newly enlarging T2 lesions (ARneT2), and annualised rate of brain atrophy (ARBA). Safety analyses: adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs (SAEs) frequencies.Results3168 patients were included in the analysis. ARR decreased with longer exposure from 0.26 (Month [M] 0–12) to 0.20 (M0–60) and 0.19 (M0–120). Most patients remained free from 6 m-CDP at M60 (79.3%) and M120 (68.1%). ARneT2 decreased from 1.31 (M0–12) to 0.90 (M0–60), and 0.71 (M0–120). Change in brain volume was stable throughout the study (−0.37 [M12], −0.33 [M60] and −0.32 [M120]). Long-term exposure did not raise new safety concerns. No increase in frequencies of AEs or SAEs per year was observed over long-term fingolimod treatment.ConclusionsLong-term follow-up confirmed the established safety profile of fingolimod. Treatment was associated with a sustained low level of disease activity as expressed by clinical and MRI outcomes.DisclaimerPreviously presented at ECTRIMS 2017

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document