scholarly journals Intravenous Penciclovir for Treatment of Herpes Simplex Infections in Immunocompromised Patients: Results of a Multicenter, Acyclovir-Controlled Trial

1999 ◽  
Vol 43 (5) ◽  
pp. 1192-1197 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hillard M. Lazarus ◽  
Robert Belanger ◽  
Anna Candoni ◽  
Mickaël Aoun ◽  
Regina Jurewicz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Herpes Simplex ◽  
Median Time ◽  
Day Treatment ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Complete Healing ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Viral Shedding ◽  
Hematologic Disorder ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Hsv Infections

ABSTRACT The efficacy and safety of penciclovir (PCV) for the treatment of herpes simplex virus (HSV) infections in immunocompromised (IC) patients were studied in a double-blind, acyclovir (ACV)-controlled, multicenter study. A total of 342 patients with mucocutaneous HSV infections received 5 mg of PCV per kg every 12 or 8 h (q12h or q8h) or 5 mg of ACV per kg q8h, beginning within 72 h of lesion onset and continuing for up to 7 days. The mean age of the patients was 49 years; 94% were white and 52% were female. The main reasons for their IC states were hematologic disorder (63%) and transplant plus hematologic disorder (16%). Clinical and virological assessments were performed daily during the 7-day treatment and then every other day until lesion healing. The primary efficacy parameter addressed new lesion formation. Secondary end points focused on viral shedding, healing, and pain. Approximately 20% of patients in each treatment group developed new lesions during therapy; thus, equivalence with ACV (defined prospectively) was demonstrated for both q12h and q8h PCV regimens. For all three treatment groups, the median time to the cessation of viral shedding was 4 days and the median time to complete healing was 8 days; there were no statistically significant differences in the rates of complete healing or the cessation of viral shedding when the results for PCV q12h and q8h were compared with those for ACV q8h. In addition, there was no statistically significant difference between PCV q12h or q8h, compared with ACV q8h, for the resolution of pain. PCV was well tolerated, with an adverse event profile comparable to that of ACV. In conclusion, PCV q12h is a well-tolerated and effective therapy for mucocutaneous HSV infection in IC patients and offers a reduced frequency of dosing compared with ACV q8h.

scholarly journals 1522. Safety and Efficacy of CR6261 in an Influenza A H1N1 Healthy Human Challenge Model

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S763-S763
Author(s):  
Alison Han ◽  
Lindsay Czajkowski ◽  
Luz Angela Rosas ◽  
Adriana Cervantes-Medina ◽  
Yongli Xiao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pharmaceutical Company ◽  
Influenza A ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Influenza Infection ◽  
Healthy Human ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Duration Of Symptoms ◽  
Viral Shedding ◽  
Influenza A H1n1 ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background Influenza virus infections cause significant morbidity and mortality during yearly seasonal epidemics and during sporadic pandemics. It is imperative to identify new targets for vaccines and therapeutics. One such target is the relatively conserved stalk region of the influenza A hemagglutinin (HA) surface protein. Methods We conducted a randomized, double-blind, Phase II placebo-controlled trial of a monoclonal antibody that targets the HA stalk (CR6261) in a H1N1pdm09 healthy volunteer human challenge model. CR6261 was infused 24 hours after challenge with H1N1pdm09 and the primary efficacy outcome was area under the curve (AUC) of viral shedding. Results Between March 2015-May 2018, 104 healthy volunteers were enrolled and randomized with 91 undergoing influenza challenge, of which 49 participants (54%) received treatment with CR6261 and 42 participants (46%) received placebo. A mean of 1x106 ng/mL of serum CR6261 was detected by 24 hours after infusion. Nasal CR6261 levels reached a peak mean of 5.97x102 ng/ml 2 days after infusion. There was no statistically significant difference in the primary outcome measure between the CR6261 group and placebo (median AUC 48.56 and 25.53 respectively, P=0.31). The severity of illness was compared between the two groups, and no significant difference was observed in number of symptoms, duration of symptoms, or FLU-PRO scores. Conclusion CR6261 had no statistically significant effect on AUC of viral shedding, and no clinically significant effect on overall influenza disease. Preexisting anti-neuraminidase (NA) antibody titers were most predictive of reduced influenza disease. Nasal CR6261 levels were much lower compared to serum, which may be a factor in the limited effect of CR6261 on this upper respiratory infection. These results suggest that a monoclonal anti-stalk approach to prevent or treat influenza infection may have limited efficacy. Future approaches should consider including and evaluating anti-stalk antibodies as part of a multi-faceted strategy rather than as a standalone therapeutic or vaccine strategy. Funding This study was funded in part by the intramural program of NIAID, NIH, by the NCI Contract No. 75N910D00024, Task Order No. 75N91019F00130, and through a CRADA with Janssen Infectious Diseases and Vaccines. Disclosures Amy Lwin, RN, BSN, Janssen Pharmaceutical Company of J&J (Employee) Jerald Sadoff, MD, Janssen Pharmaceutical Company of J&J (Employee)

scholarly journals A Phase 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of the monoclonal antibody MHAA4549A in patients with acute uncomplicated influenza A infection

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy J Lim ◽  
Sadia Dar ◽  
Dirk Venter ◽  
Juan P Horcajada ◽  
Priya Kulkarni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Monoclonal Antibody ◽  
Viral Load ◽  
Median Time ◽  
Influenza A ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Human Monoclonal Antibody ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Double Blind Placebo ◽  
Viral Shedding

Abstract Background MHAA4549A, a human monoclonal antibody targeting the influenza A hemagglutinin stalk, neutralizes influenza A virus in animal and human volunteer challenge studies. We investigated MHAA4549A safety and tolerability, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics in outpatients with acute, uncomplicated influenza A infection. Methods This was a Phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of single intravenous (IV) doses of 3600 mg or 8400 mg MHAA4549A, or IV placebo in adult outpatients testing positive for influenza A. Patients were enrolled across 35 sites in 6 countries. Randomization and dosing occurred ≤ 72 hours of symptom onset; study duration was 14 weeks. The primary endpoint was the nature and frequency of adverse events (AEs). Secondary endpoints included median time to alleviation of all influenza symptoms, effects on nasopharyngeal viral load and duration of viral shedding, and MHAA4549A serum pharmacokinetics. Results Of 125 randomized patients, 124 received study treatment, with 99 confirmed positive for influenza A by central testing. Frequency of AEs between MHAA4549A and placebo groups was similar; nausea was most common (8 patients; 6.5%). MHAA4549A serum exposure was confirmed in all MHAA4549A-treated patients and was dose proportional. No hospitalizations or deaths occurred. Between MHAA4549A and placebo groups, no statistically significant differences occurred in median time to alleviation of all symptoms, nasopharyngeal viral load, or duration of viral shedding. Conclusions While MHAA4549A was safe and well-tolerated with confirmed exposure, the antibody did not improve clinical outcomes in patients with acute uncomplicated influenza A infection.

Safety evaluation of an antimalarial herbal product from Andrographis paniculata (AS201-01) in healthy volunteers

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aty Widyawaruyanti ◽  
Arijanto Jonosewojo ◽  
Hilkatul Ilmi ◽  
Lidya Tumewu ◽  
Ario Imandiri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Glucose ◽  
Healthy Volunteers ◽  
Day Treatment ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Andrographis Paniculata ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Healthy Human ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Random Blood Glucose ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Objectives Andrographis paniculata tablets (AS201-01) have previously been shown to have potent bioactivity as an antimalarial and to produce no unwanted side effects in animal models. Here, we present the phase 1 clinical trial conducted to evaluate the safety of AS201-01 tablets in healthy volunteers. Methods The study was a randomized, double-blind controlled cross-over, a placebo-controlled design consisting of a 4-day treatment of AS201-01 tablets. A total of 30 healthy human volunteers (16 males and 14 females) were divided into two groups, and each group was given 4 tablets, twice daily for 4 days. Group 1 received AS201-01, while group 2 received placebo tablets. Volunteers were given a physical examination before the treatment. The effects of AS201-01 on random blood glucose, biochemical, and hematological as well as urine profiles were investigated. Results There were no changes in observed parameters as a result of AS201-01 being administered. Statistical analysis showed no significant difference (p>0.05) between the test and control group regarding hematology profile, biochemical profile, and random blood glucose. Increased appetite and better sleep, which categorized as grade 1 adverse event was reported after treatment with AS201-01 tablet Conclusions The outcome supports our previous observation that the AS201-01 tablet, given twice a day for 4 days, is safe and nontoxic.

scholarly journals Effects of Fermented Milk Containing Lacticaseibacillus paracasei Strain Shirota on Constipation in Patients with Depression: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

Nutrients ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (7) ◽  
pp. 2238
Author(s):  
Xiaomei Zhang ◽  
Shanbin Chen ◽  
Ming Zhang ◽  
Fazheng Ren ◽  
Yimei Ren ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Illness ◽  
Placebo Group ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Fermented Milk ◽  
Daily Consumption ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Tnf Α ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Factor Α

Probiotics have been shown to benefit patients with constipation and depression, but whether they specifically alleviate constipation in patients with depression remains unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of Lacticaseibacillus paracasei strain Shirota (LcS), formerly Lactobacillus casei strain Shirota, on constipation in patients with depression with specific etiology and gut microbiota and on depressive regimens. Eighty-two patients with constipation were recruited. The subjects consumed 100 mL of a LcS beverage (108 CFU/mL) or placebo every day for 9 weeks. After ingesting beverages for this period, we observed no significant differences in the total patient constipation-symptom (PAC-SYM) scores in the LcS group when compared with the placebo group. However, symptoms/scores in item 7 (rectal tearing or bleeding after a bowel movement) and items 8–12 (stool symptom subscale) were more alleviated in the LcS group than in the placebo group. The Beck Depression Index (BDI) and Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) scores were all significantly decreased, and the degree of depression was significantly improved in both the placebo and LcS groups (p < 0.05), but there was no significant difference between the groups. The LcS intervention increased the beneficial Adlercreutzia, Megasphaera and Veillonella levels and decreased the bacterial levels related to mental illness, such as Rikenellaceae_RC9_gut_group, Sutterella and Oscillibacter. Additionally, the interleukin (IL)-1β, IL-6, and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) levels were significantly decreased in both the placebo and LcS groups (p < 0.05). In particular, the IL-6 levels were significantly lower in the LcS group than the placebo group after the ingestion period (p < 0.05). In conclusion, the daily consumption of LcS for 9 weeks appeared to relieve constipation and improve the potentially depressive symptoms in patients with depression and significantly decrease the IL-6 levels. In addition, the LcS supplementation also appeared to regulate the intestinal microbiota related to mental illness.

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.

TOP-PRO study: A randomized double-blind controlled trial of topiramate versus propranolol for prevention of chronic migraine

Cephalalgia ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 033310242110474
Author(s):  
Debashish Chowdhury ◽  
Luv Bansal ◽  
Ashish Duggal ◽  
Debabrata Datta ◽  
Ankit Mundra ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Chronic Migraine ◽  
Virus Disease ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Preventive Treatment ◽  
Point Estimate ◽  
Tolerability Profile ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Mean

Objective The aim of the TOP-PRO-study, a double-blind randomized controlled trial, was to assess the efficacy (non-inferiority) and tolerability of propranolol compared to topiramate for the prevention of chronic migraine. Background Except for topiramate, oral preventive treatment for chronic migraine lacks credible evidence. Methods Chronic migraine patients aged above 18 years and less than 65 years of age, not on any preventive treatment were randomly allocated to receive topiramate (100 mg/day) or propranolol (160 mg/day). The primary efficacy outcome was the mean change in migraine days per 28 days at the end of 24 weeks from baseline. A mean difference of 1.5 days per four weeks was chosen as the cut-off delta value. Multiple secondary efficacy outcomes and treatment emergent adverse events were also assessed. Results As against the planned sample size of 244, only 175 patients could be enrolled before the spread of the corona virus disease-2019 pandemic and enforcement of lockdown in India. Of the 175 randomized patients, 95 (topiramate 46 and propranolol 49) completed the trial. The mean change in migraine days was −5.3 ± 1.2 vs −7.3 ± 1.1 days (p = 0.226) for topiramate and propranolol groups respectively. Propranolol was found to be non-inferior and not superior to topiramate (point estimate of −1.99 with a 95% confidence interval of −5.23 to 1.25 days). Multiple secondary outcomes also did not differ between the two groups. Intention to treat analysis of 175 patients and per-protocol analysis of 95 patients yielded concordant results. There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse events between the two groups. Conclusion Propranolol (160mg/day) was non-inferior, non-superior to topiramate (100mg/day) for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine and had a comparable tolerability profile. Trial Registration: Clinical Trials Registry-India CTRI/2019/05/018997)

scholarly journals A double-blind randomized controlled trial of topical Curcuma xanthorrhiza Roxb. on mild psoriasis: clinical manifestations, histopathological features, and K6 expressions

2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 178-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Githa Rahmayunita ◽  
Tjut N.A. Jacoeb ◽  
Endi Novianto ◽  
Wresti Indriatmi ◽  
Rahadi Rihatmadja ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Clinical Manifestations ◽  
Effective Treatment Option ◽  
Psoriasis Area Severity Index ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Old Patients ◽  
Mean Values ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Curcuma Xanthorrhiza ◽  
The Difference

Background: Curcuma xanthorrhiza Roxb. exerts its anti-inflammatory effects by reducing the concentration of IL-6, IL-8, and phosphorylase kinase, which has role in keratinocyte proliferation. Our study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of C. xanthorrhiza in psoriasis.Methods: From 18 to 59 year-old patients with mild psoriasis, 2 similar lesions were selected. The severity assessment was based on the psoriasis area severity index (PASI), Trozak score, and K6 expression. Using a double-blinded randomized method, lesion was treated with 1% C. xanthorrhiza ointment vs placebo for 4 weeks. The results were analyzed by the chi-square test using STATATM V.12 software (Stata Corp.).Results: The study was conducted in 2010 to 2012 with 17 subjects participated. The median of PASI score were reduced significantly in both lesions, either treated with 1% C. xanthorrhiza ointment vs placebo; however when compared between the group, it was not significant (p=0.520). The Trozak score were reduced in lesions treated with 1% C. xanthorrhiza ointment; but it was not significant (p = 0.306). In lesions treated with placebo, the Trozak score was increased significantly. The difference of Trozak score between lesions treated with C. xanthorrhiza and placebo was significant (p=0.024). There was no significant difference of K6 expression in lesions treated with 1% C. xanthorrhiza ointments or placebo as well as on the difference of mean values of K6 expression between the group (p=0.827).Conclusion: Based on the results, 1% C. xanthorrhiza ointment is effective treatment option for mild psoriasis, but longer follow-up period is suggested to confirm this results. C. xanthorrhiza ointment is safe for topical administration as there were no side effects reported in this study.

A double-blind placebo-controlled trial of perioperative prophylactic antibiotics for elective neurosurgery

1988 ◽  
Vol 69 (5) ◽  
pp. 687-691 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ross Bullock ◽  
James R. van Dellen ◽  
William Ketelbey ◽  
S. Gustav Reinach
Keyword(s):  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Prophylactic Antibiotics ◽  
Risk Of Infection ◽  
Broad Spectrum Antibiotic ◽  
Wound Sepsis ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Exact Test ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
To Receive

✓ In this study, 417 patients undergoing “clean” elective neurosurgical operative procedures were randomized to receive a broad-spectrum antibiotic (piperacillin) or placebo given as three perioperative doses, each 6 hours apart. Randomization was carried out by hospital pharmacists, and the investigators remained blinded until the end of the study. Twenty cases were excluded from analysis because either an unforeseen second operation was performed or antibiotic therapy was initiated within 30 days after surgery to treat infection or the risk of infection. Twelve of the 205 patients treated with placebo developed postoperative wound sepsis, and four of the 192 piperacillin-treated patients developed wound sepsis — a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05, Fisher's exact test). Piperacillin thus appeared to reduce the incidence of neurosurgical wound infection in this study.

scholarly journals Randomised Double-Blind Trial of Combination Antibiotic Therapy in Rheumatoid Arthritis

2011 ◽  
Vol 2011 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela Smith ◽  
Caroline Doré ◽  
Peter Charles ◽  
Alena Vallance ◽  
Tara Potier ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Placebo Group ◽  
Active Treatment ◽  
Active Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Primary Outcome Measure ◽  
Good Evidence ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Acr20 Response ◽  
Significant Difference

Objective. A combination of intravenous clindamycin and oral tetracycline has been used for many years as a treatment for active rheumatoid arthritis (RA), despite the absence of good evidence for its efficacy. A single-blind pilot study of this therapy suggested that a double-blind placebo-controlled trial was warranted.Methods. Patients with active RA were randomised in a 2 : 1 ratio to receive active treatment or placebo for 25 weeks. The active treatment consisted of intravenous clindamycin in a reducing regime, and oral tetracycline twice daily three times a week. 50 patients were to be recruited. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients achieving an ACR20 response.Results. An interim statistical analysis was performed after 20 patients had completed the study. Two patients in the active group achieved an ACR20 response, with none in the placebo group (NS). There was a better ESR20 response in the placebo group (P=.02). There were no other significant differences between the groups. The results indicated that it was unlikely that a significant difference in ACR20 response would emerge if the remaining 30 patients were recruited. The trial was therefore halted.Conclusion. This antibiotic regime is unlikely to be a valuable therapy for active rheumatoid arthritis.

scholarly journals Does the packaging of health information affect the assessment of its reliability? A randomized controlled trial protocol

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Leela Raj ◽  
Denise Smith ◽  
James Heilman
Keyword(s):  
Health Information ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Online Health Information ◽  
Plain Language ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
University Campuses ◽  
University Of Oxford ◽  
Written Information ◽  
Significant Difference

Background Wikipedia is frequently used as a source of health information. However, the quality of its content varies widely across articles. The DISCERN tool is a brief questionnaire developed in 1996 by the Division of Public Health and Primary Health Care of the Institute of Health Sciences of the University of Oxford. They claim it provides users with a valid and reliable way of assessing the quality of written information. However, the DISCERN instrument’s reliability in measuring the quality of online health information, particularly whether or not its scores are affected by reader biases about specific publication sources, has not yet been explored. Methods This study is a double-blind randomized assessment of a Wikipedia article versus a BMJ literature review using a modified version of the DISCERN tool. Participants will include physicians and medical residents from four university campuses in Ontario and British Columbia and will be randomized into one of four study arms. Inferential statistics tests (paired t-test, multi-level ordinal regression, and one-way ANOVA) will be conducted with the data collected from the study. Outcomes The primary outcome of this study will be to determine whether a statistically significant difference in DISCERN scores exists, which could suggest whether or not how health information is packaged influences how it is assessed for quality. Plain Language Summary The internet, and in particular Wikipedia, is an important way for professionals, students and the public to obtain health information. For this reason, the DISCERN tool was developed in 1996 to help users assess the quality of the health information they find. The ability of DISCERN to measure the quality of online health information has been supported with research, but the role of bias has not necessarily been accounted for. Does how the information is packaged influence how the information itself is evaluated? This study will compare the scores assigned to articles in their original format to the same articles in a modified format in order to determine whether the DISCERN tool is able to overcome bias. A significant difference in ratings between original and inverted articles will suggest that the DISCERN tool lacks the ability to overcome bias related to how health information is packaged.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document