The ‘Act When Mild’ (AwM) Study: A Step Forward in Our Understanding of Early Treatment in Acute Migraine

Cephalalgia ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 28 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. 36-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
PJ Goadsby
Keyword(s):  
Pain Intensity ◽  
Group Treatment ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Primary Outcome Measure ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Intention To Treat ◽  
Severe Stage ◽  
Headache Onset ◽  
Severe Group

An important issue in the management of migraine is the advice given to patients as to when to take their treatment in the course of the attack. While it seems common sense almost to take treatment early in the attack, the evidence base for that advice is not as robust as could be expected. The ‘Act when Mild’ (AwM) Study was a randomized, four-arm, multicentre, multinational, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of almotriptan (12.5 mg) to compare outcomes after administration of treatment when pain intensity was mild and within 1 h of headache onset (mild/early) with outcomes when pain had become moderate or severe. Of 491 migraineurs enrolled, 403 were evaluable with an intention-to-treat population (ITT) of 404. At the primary end-point, 2 h pain free, on the ITT analysis 49% of patients in the almotriptan 12.5 mg treat early/mild group and 40% in the treat moderate/severe group had responded ( P = 0.21). Of these patients, 43 did not take medication according to their randomly allocated baseline pain intensity (mild or moderate/severe) and were subsequently reassigned, prior to study unblinding, to the appropriate group (AwM population) for re-analysis of the primary outcome measure: 2-h pain-free rates. In the almotriptan arms, 53% of the mild/early group and 37.5% of the moderate/severe group were pain free at 2 h ( P = 0.02; AwM population). The corresponding proportions in the placebo groups were 24.7% and 17.5% (significantly lower than the respective almotriptan arms; P ≤ 0.01). Considering the ITT population, secondary end-points were also significantly in favour of treatment with almotriptan in the mild/early vs. the moderate/severe stage, including: sustained pain-free, 45.6% vs. 30.5% ( P = 0.02); headache recurrence at 24 h, 6% vs. 24% ( P = 0.0124). Adverse events were reported in < 5% of patients, with no significant differences between almotriptan and placebo and no serious events in any group. Treatment with almotriptan while migraine pain is still mild and within 1 h of onset provides statistically significant and clinically relevant enhancements in efficacy compared with waiting until pain has reached higher severity levels.

Early vs. Non-Early Intervention in Acute Migraine — ‘Act When Mild (AwM)’. A Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Almotriptan

Cephalalgia ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 383-391 ◽  
Author(s):  
PJ Goadsby ◽  
G Zanchin ◽  
G Geraud ◽  
N de Klippel ◽  
S Diaz-Insa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Early Intervention ◽  
Pain Intensity ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Double Blind Placebo ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
Intention To Treat ◽  
Headache Onset ◽  
Treatment Administration ◽  
Pain Patients

The study was designed to compare the response to almotriptan in migraine patients who take medication early in the course of the attack with that when medication is taken after pain has become moderate or severe. A randomized, four-arm, multicentre, multinational, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of almotriptan (12.5 mg) comparing treatment administration when pain intensity was mild and within 1 h of headache onset vs. pain that had become moderate or severe was conducted. Of 491 migraineurs enrolled, 403 were evaluable [intention-to-treat population (ITT)]. Their mean age was 38 years, 84% were female and they had a mean of 3.7 attacks/month. Of these patients, 10% did not take medication according to their randomly allocated basal pain intensity (mild or moderate/severe) and were subsequently reassigned to that group for this analysis —'Act when Mild (AwM)' group. In the almotriptan arms, 53% of mild basal pain and 38% of moderate/severe basal pain patients were pain free at 2 h ( P = 0.03; primary end-point). Corresponding proportions in the placebo groups were 25% and 17% (statistically significant vs. respective almotriptan arms). Secondary end-points (ITT) were also significantly in favour of early intervention with almotriptan, both between and across treatment groups, such as sustained pain free: 45.6% vs. 30.5% ( P = 0.02). Adverse events were reported in < 5% of treated patients in all groups (NS), with no serious events. Treatment with almotriptan while migraine pain is still mild provides statistically significant and clinically relevant enhancements in efficacy compared with treatment when pain has reached higher severity levels.

scholarly journals Efficacy of high-volume injections with and without corticosteroid compared with sham for Achilles tendinopathy: a protocol for a randomised controlled trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. e001136
Author(s):  
Peter Malliaras ◽  
David Connell ◽  
Anders Ploug Boesen ◽  
Rebecca S Kearney ◽  
Hylton B Menz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Exercise Intervention ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
High Volume ◽  
Primary Outcome Measure ◽  
Achilles Tendinopathy ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Sham Injection ◽  
Intention To Treat ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionAchilles tendinopathy (AT) is a common and disabling musculoskeletal condition. First-line management involving Achilles tendon loading exercise with, or without, other modalities may not resolve the problem in up to 44% of cases. Many people receive injections. Yet there are no injection treatments with demonstrated long-term efficacy. The aim of the trial is to examine the 12-month efficacy of high-volume injection (HVI) with corticosteroid and HVI without corticosteroid versus sham injection among individuals with AT.Methods and analysisThe trial is a three-arm, parallel group, double-blind, superiority randomised controlled trial that will assess the efficacy of HVI with and without corticosteroid versus sham up to 12 months. We will block-randomise 192 participants to one of the three groups with a 1:1:1 ratio, and both participants and outcome assessors will be blinded to treatment allocation. All participants will receive an identical evidence-based education and exercise intervention. The primary outcome measure will be the Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment – Achilles (VISA-A) at 12 months post-randomisation, a validated, reliable and disease-specific measure of pain and function. Choice of secondary outcomes was informed by core outcome domains for tendinopathy. Data will be analysed using the intention-to-treat principle.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval was obtained via the Monash University Human Ethics Committee (no: 13138). The study is expected to be completed in 2024 and disseminated via peer review publication and conference presentations.Trial registration numberAustralia and New Zealand Clinical trials registry (ACTRN12619001455156)

scholarly journals Low-dose naltrexone for the treatment of fibromyalgia: protocol for a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial

Trials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Karin Due Bruun ◽  
Kirstine Amris ◽  
Henrik Bjarke Vaegter ◽  
Morten Rune Blichfeldt-Eckhardt ◽  
Anders Holsgaard-Larsen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pain Intensity ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Muscle Performance ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Intention To Treat ◽  
Average Pain Intensity ◽  
Average Pain ◽  
Secondary Outcomes ◽  
Low Dose Naltrexone

Abstract Background Low-dose naltrexone (LDN) is used widely as an off-label treatment for pain despite limited evidence for its effectiveness. A few small trials with a high risk of bias have investigated the effect of LDN on pain associated with fibromyalgia in women, but larger and more methodologically robust studies are needed. The primary aim of this randomized controlled trial is to investigate if 12 weeks of LDN treatment is superior to placebo in reducing the average pain intensity during the last 7 days in women with fibromyalgia. Methods A single-center, permuted block randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial will be performed in Denmark. Randomization comprises 100 women aged 18–64 years diagnosed with fibromyalgia who will be treated with either LDN or placebo for 12 weeks including a 4-week titration phase. The primary outcome is change in average pain intensity (during the last 7 days) from baseline to 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes are other fibromyalgia-related symptoms, i.e., tenderness, fatigue, sleep disturbance, stiffness, memory problems, depression, anxiety and measures of global assessment, physical function, impact of fibromyalgia, pain distribution, and health-related quality of life. Intention-to-treat analysis will be performed, and the number of responders with a more than 15%, 30%, and 50% improvement of pain after 12 weeks will be calculated for the LDN and placebo groups. Exploratory outcomes include measures of pain sensitivity, muscle performance, and biomarkers. Discussion This study will contribute with high-level evidence on the efficacy of low-dose naltrexone for the treatment of pain in women with fibromyalgia. Secondary outcomes include both disease-specific and generic components investigating whether LDN influences other symptoms than pain. Explorative outcomes are included to provide greater insight into the mechanism of action of LDN and possibly a better understanding of the underlying pathology in fibromyalgia. Trial registration EudraCT 2019-000702-30. Registered on 12 July 2019. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04270877. Registered on 17 February 2020

TP1-3 Final phase of recruitment and statistics analysis plan for Dex-CSDH trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 90 (3) ◽  
pp. e10.4-e11
Author(s):  
E Edlmann ◽  
A Kolias ◽  
E Thelin ◽  
D Gatt ◽  
Y Al-Tamimi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Statistical Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Secondary Analysis ◽  
Statistical Analysis Plan ◽  
Primary Outcome Measure ◽  
Favourable Outcome ◽  
Absolute Difference ◽  
Primary Analysis ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Intention To Treat

ObjectivesReview recruitment progression and statistical analysis plan for Dex-CSDH trial.DesignA UK multi-centre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of dexamethasone versus placebo for CSDH.SubjectsSymptomatic, adult CSDH patients admitted to a participating neurosurgical unit.MethodsTrial participants receive a 2 week course of dexamethasone in addition to standard care, including surgery. The primary outcome measure is the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 6 months. An mRS of 0–3 requires the patient to be independently mobile and we have considered this a favourable outcome, with scores 4–6 (non-mobile) as unfavourable. The primary analysis will be performed on an intention-to-treat basis, estimating the absolute difference between the two treatment arms in the proportions achieving a favourable outcome. Secondary analysis will be done with an ordinal analysis of mRS scores and proportional odds logistic regression of the original mRS score adjusting for baseline covariates (age, GCS).Results629/750 patients (84%) have been recruited to the Dex-CSDH trial which is on-going as of 20-06-2018. Recruitment progress and follow-up at time of presentation will be reviewed alongside full statistical analysis plan.ConclusionsThe Dex-CSDH trial is drawing close to target following excellent recruitment across 22 UK centres. Transparent communication of the statistical analysis plan is essential prior to unblinding of the data. Up-to-date recruitment and primary endpoint completion rates will also be reviewed.

scholarly journals Low dose naltrexone for the treatment of fibromyalgia: Protocol for a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karin Due Bruun ◽  
Kirstine Amris ◽  
Henrik Bjarke Vaegter ◽  
Morten Rune Blichfeldt-Eckhardt ◽  
Anders Holsgaard-Larsen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pain Intensity ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Muscle Performance ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Intention To Treat ◽  
Average Pain Intensity ◽  
Average Pain ◽  
Secondary Outcomes ◽  
Low Dose Naltrexone

Abstract Background Low dose naltrexone (LDN) is used widely as off-label treatment for pain despite limited evidence for its effectiveness. A few small trials with high risk of bias have investigated the effect of LDN on pain associated with fibromyalgia in women, but larger and more methodologically robust studies are needed. The primary aim of this randomized controlled trial is to investigate if 12 weeks of LDN treatment is superior to placebo in reducing the average pain intensity during the last seven days in women with fibromyalgia.Methods A single-center, permuted block randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial will be performed in Denmark. Randomization comprises 100 women aged 18–64 years and diagnosed with fibromyalgia who will be treated with either LDN or placebo for 12 weeks including a four-week titration phase. The primary outcome is change in average pain intensity (during the last seven days) from baseline to 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes are other fibromyalgia-related symptoms, i.e. tenderness, fatigue, sleep disturbance, stiffness, memory problems, depression, anxiety and measures of global assessment, physical function, impact of fibromyalgia, pain distribution, and health-related quality of life. Intention-to-treat analysis will be performed, and the number of responders with a more than 15%, 30%, and 50% improvement of pain after 12 weeks will be calculated for the LDN and placebo groups. Exploratory outcomes include measures of pain sensitivity, muscle performance, and biomarkers.Discussion This study will contribute with high-level evidence on the efficacy of low dose naltrexone for the treatment of pain in women with fibromyalgia. Secondary outcomes include both disease-specific and generic components investigating whether LDN influences other symptoms than pain. Explorative outcomes are included to provide greater insight into the mechanism of action of LDN and possibly a better understanding of the underlying pathology in fibromyalgia.Trial registration: EudraCT number 2019-000702-30 (registered on 2019-07-12). ClincalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04270877 (registered on 2020-02-17).

scholarly journals A Randomised, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of As-Needed Naltrexone in the Treatment of Pathological Gambling

2015 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 70-79 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leena Kovanen ◽  
Syaron Basnet ◽  
Sari Castrén ◽  
Maiju Pankakoski ◽  
Sirkku T. Saarikoski ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pathological Gambling ◽  
Psychosocial Support ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Treatment Strategies ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Primary Outcome Measure ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Significant Treatment ◽  
Double Blind Placebo ◽  
Intention To Treat

Background/Aims: Effective treatment strategies are needed for the treatment of pathological gambling (PG). The efficacy of as-needed naltrexone was assessed in a single-centre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Methods: The participants (n = 101) received either as-needed placebo or naltrexone (50 mg) and psychosocial support for 20 weeks. The primary outcome measure was the severity of PG assessed by the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale adapted for PG (PG-YBOCS). Secondary gambling-related outcome measures included thoughts/urges and behaviour subscales of PG-YBOCS as well as the highest daily expenditure and gambling frequency. In addition, RAND-36 scales of emotional well-being and social functioning were used as outcomes. The results were analysed using the intention-to-treat principle and linear random effects modelling. Results: No significant treatment group differences were found. In an exploratory analysis, emotional well-being increased in a subgroup of participants with AA genotype of opioid receptor, mu 1 (OPRM1) A118G polymorphism (p = 0.02). Conclusion: Overall, the as-needed naltrexone may not provide substantial additional benefit for PG patients receiving psychosocial support. Replication by larger scale studies is warranted to further evaluate naltrexone administration schedules for the treatment of PG and the role of OPRM1.

scholarly journals Long-Term Safety and Efficacy of Prebiotic Enriched Infant Formula—A Randomized Controlled Trial

Nutrients ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 1276
Author(s):  
Franka Neumer ◽  
Orenci Urraca ◽  
Joaquin Alonso ◽  
Jesús Palencia ◽  
Vicente Varea ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Infant Formula ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Fecal Microbiota ◽  
First Year ◽  
Double Blind Study ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Term Infants ◽  
Intention To Treat ◽  
Prebiotic Oligosaccharides ◽  
First Year Of Life

The present study aims to evaluate the effects of an infant formula supplemented with a mixture of prebiotic short and long chain inulin-type oligosaccharides on health outcomes, safety and tolerance, as well as on fecal microbiota composition during the first year of life. In a prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blind study, n = 160 healthy term infants under 4 months of age were randomized to receive either an infant formula enriched with 0.8 g/dL of Orafti®Synergy1 or an unsupplemented control formula until the age of 12 months. Growth, fever (>38 °C) and infections were regularly followed up by a pediatrician. Digestive symptoms, stool consistency as well as crying and sleeping patterns were recorded during one week each study month. Fecal microbiota and immunological biomarkers were determined from a subgroup of infants after 2, 6 and 12 months of life. The intention to treat (ITT) population consisted of n = 149 infants. Both formulae were well tolerated. Mean duration of infections was significantly lower in the prebiotic fed infants (p < 0.05). The prebiotic group showed higher Bifidobacterium counts at month 6 (p = 0.006), and higher proportions of Bifidobacterium in relation to total bacteria at month 2 and 6 (p = 0.042 and p = 0.013, respectively). Stools of infants receiving the prebiotic formula were softer (p < 0.05). Orafti®Synergy1 tended to beneficially impact total daily amount of crying (p = 0.0594). Supplementation with inulin-type prebiotic oligosaccharides during the first year of life beneficially modulates the infant gut microbiota towards higher Bifidobacterium levels at the first 6 months of life, and is associated with reduced duration of infections.

scholarly journals Impact of Fatty Acid Supplementation on Cognitive Performance among United States (US) Military Officers: The Ranger Resilience and Improved Performance on Phospholipid-Bound Omega-3’s (RRIPP-3) Study

Nutrients ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 1854
Author(s):  
Bernadette P. Marriott ◽  
Travis H. Turner ◽  
Joseph R. Hibbeln ◽  
Jill C. Newman ◽  
Marcie Pregulman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
The United States ◽  
Military Officers ◽  
Krill Oil ◽  
Omega 3 ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Significant Group ◽  
Intention To Treat ◽  
Improved Performance

Studies have assessed omega-3 fatty acids and cognitive decline among older adults and cognitive development among children, although less is known about cognitive or neurological effects among young adults. We examined whether omega-3 supplementation from krill oil could improve cognition and resilience among young military officers compared to a control. This double-blind, placebo-controlled trial enrolled 555 officers (mean age 23.4 ± 2.8, 98.6% male) entering the United States (US) Army Infantry Basic Officer Leaders Course (IBOLC) with the intention to complete the US Ranger Course. Volunteer participants consumed eight dietary supplements daily of krill oil containing 2.3 g omega-3 or control (macadamia nut oil) over an approximate 20-week period. Cognitive functioning, resilience, and mood were assessed during a well-rested period at approximately 14 weeks and after a battlefield simulation at 16 weeks. Blood spot samples were collected to monitor compliance and dietary intake was assessed. All hypotheses were tested using both ‘Intention to Treat’ (ITT) and ‘As Per Protocol’ (APP) approaches. Of the 555 randomized individuals, 245 (44.1%) completed the study. No statistically significant group-by-time interactions indicating treatment effect were found on any outcomes. Poor compliance was indicated by lower than expected omega-3 elevations in the treatment group, and may have contributed to a failure to detect a response.

scholarly journals Methotrimeprazine versus haloperidol in palliative care patients with cancer-related nausea: a randomised, double-blind controlled trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. e029942 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janet Rea Hardy ◽  
Helen Skerman ◽  
Jennifer Philip ◽  
Phillip Good ◽  
David C Currow ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Response Rates ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Response To Treatment ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Intention To Treat ◽  
Point Reduction

ObjectivesMethotrimeprazine is commonly used for the management of nausea but never tested formally against other drugs used in this setting. The aim was to demonstrate superior antiemetic efficacy.DesignDouble-blind, randomised, controlled trial of methotrimeprazine versus haloperidol.Setting11 palliative care sites in Australia.ParticipantsParticipants were >18 years, had cancer, an average nausea score of ≥3/10 and able to tolerate oral medications. Ineligible patients had acute nausea related to treatment, nausea for which a specific antiemetic was indicated, were about to undergo a procedure or had received either of the study drugs or a change in glucocorticoid dose within the previous 48 hours.InterventionsBased on previous studies, haloperidol was used as the control. Participants were randomised to encapsulated methotrimeprazine 6·25 mg or haloperidol 1·5 mg one time or two times per day and assessed every 24 hours for 72 hours.Main outcome measuresA ≥two-point reduction in nausea score at 72 hours from baseline. Secondary outcome measures were as follows: complete response at 72 hours (end nausea score less than 3), response at 24 and 48 hours, vomiting episodes, use of rescue antiemetics, harms and global impression of change.ResultsResponse to treatment at 72 hours was 75% (44/59) in the haloperidol (H) arm and 63% (36/57) in the methotrimeprazine (M) arm with no difference between groups (intention-to-treat analysis). Complete response rates were 56% (H) and 51% (M). In theper protocolanalysis, there was no difference in response rates: (85% (44/52) (H) and 74% (36/49) (M). Completeper protocolresponse rates were 64% (H) and 59% (M). Toxicity worse than baseline was minimal with a trend towards greater sedation in the methotrimeprazine arm.ConclusionThis study did not demonstrate any difference in response rate between methotrimeprazine and haloperidol in the control of nausea.Trial registration numberACTRN 12615000177550.

Relief of pain and trismus in patients treated with naproxen or acetylsalicylic acid after tonsillectomy

1988 ◽  
Vol 102 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Kristensen ◽  
K. Tveteraas ◽  
P. Hein ◽  
H. B. Poulsen ◽  
K. E. Outzen
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Acetylsalicylic Acid ◽  
Pain Intensity ◽  
Sleep Disturbances ◽  
Significant Positive Correlation ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Therapeutic Gain

AbstractThe pain-relieving efficacy of naproxen and acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) in tonsillectomized patients was compared in a double blind parallel clinical trial comprising 83 patients, among whom 42 were treated with naproxen and 41 with ASA. The patients were treated post-operatively for two days with either naproxen suppositories 500 mg. twice, or ASA effervescent tablets 1000 mg. three times, daily.The therapeutic gain was evaluated by recording the intensity of pain, reduced ability to open the mouth (trismus), consumption of supplementary analgesic (parcetamol), and pain-related sleep disturbances.The statistical analysis of the results revealed no differences in pain intensity, consumption of additional analgesics or pain-related sleep disturbances in the two treatment groups. A considerable degree of trismus was demonstrated in most of the tonsillectomized patients. This reduced ability to open the mouth was gradually overcome in the naproxen group while it remained unchanged in the ASA group, however, no statistical significant difference could be demonstrated. Additionally, no significant positive correlation between pain intensity and trismus was proven. The pain-relieving effect, however, was unsatisfactory in both the naproxen and the ASA group, and clinical controlled trial studies of alternative analgetics in tonsillectomized patients are still to be encouraged.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document