scholarly journals A multicentre, multi-national, double-blind, randomised, active-controlled, parallel-group clinical study to assess the safety and efficacy of PDA10 (Epoetin-alpha) vs. Eprex® in patients with anaemia of chronic renal failure

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Soo Kun Lim ◽  
Bak Leong Goh ◽  
Ravindran Visvanathan ◽  
Su Hyun Kim ◽  
Jin Seok Jeon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Safety Profile ◽  
Weekly Dose ◽  
Research Information ◽  
Renal Anaemia ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Potential Cost ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Parallel Group ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background Erythropoietin stimulating agent (ESA) has been standard of care in treating renal anaemia for the past 20 years. Many patients have limited access to ESA in view of long-term costs leading to suboptimal ESA dosage. Biosimilar epoetin is a potential cost-effective alternative to originator for optimal renal anaemia management. Objective To determine efficacy and safety of PDA10 in treating renal anaemia in haemodialysis patients, in comparison to the originator epoetin-α, Eprex®. Methods A phase 3, multicentre, multi-national, double-blind, randomised, active-controlled and parallel group study conducted over 40 weeks in Malaysia and Korea. End stage kidney disease patients undergoing regular haemodialysis who were on erythropoietin treatment were recruited. The study has 3 phases, which included a 12-week titration phase, followed by 28-week double-blind treatment phase and 24-week open-label extension phase. Results The PDA10 and Eprex® were shown to be therapeutically equivalent (p < 0.0001) with mean absolute change in haemoglobin from baseline of − 0.176 (± 0.91) g/dl and − 0.118 (± 1.114) g/dl, respectively. Weekly dose change was 10.01 IU/kg/week in PDA10 group and 10.30 IU/kg/week in Eprex® group, which has no significant difference. There were no significant differences in the safety profile between PDA10 and Eprex® groups. Conclusion This study has confirmed the therapeutic equivalence between PDA10 and Eprex® in terms of efficacy, dosage requirement and safety profile in haemodialysis patients with renal anaemia. Trial registration The study was registered with the National Medical Research Register (NMRR-13-400-16313). This study has been registered retrospectively with Clinical Research Information Service (CRiS), Republic of Korea on 25 March 2021.

scholarly journals A Randomized, Double Blind, Placebo Controlled, Parallel-Group Study to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of Curene® versus Placebo in Reducing Symptoms of Knee OA

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sanjib kumar Panda ◽  
Somashekara Nirvanashetty ◽  
Vivek A. Parachur ◽  
Nilima Mohanty ◽  
Tathastu Swain
Keyword(s):  
Safety Profile ◽  
Womac Score ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
Double Blind Placebo ◽  
Knee Oa ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Parallel Group Study ◽  
Parallel Group ◽  
Excellent Safety Profile

Background. Curene® is a bioavailable formulation of turmeric  Curcucma longa extract comprising naturally derived curcuminoids formulated with proprietary Aquasome® technology. Curcuminoids were found to have anti-inflammatory properties by inhibiting Cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) and 5-lipoxygenase (5-LOX) enzyme and hence have potential application in the treatment of Osteoarthritis (OA). To evaluate the safety and efficacy of Curene® a randomized, double blind, placebo controlled, parallel-group study was conducted in subjects with knee OA. Significant improvements in clinical endpoints were observed during the trial along with excellent safety profile. Methods. Fifty (50) subjects aged between 40 and 75 years who were suffering from unilateral or bilateral OA of the knee for greater than 3 months according to American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria were enrolled. They were randomized into two treatment groups; one group received Curene® 500 mg once daily and the other group received placebo. Efficacy was evaluated using change from baseline in Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score. Biochemical and hematological parameters including urine analysis were performed to evaluate the safety of Curene® in OA patients. Result. Forty-six (46) subjects completed the study. The reduction from baseline in total WOMAC score (also subscale scores) and VAS score resulted in statistically significant difference when compared to placebo. It was also found to be safe and well tolerated as there was no incidence of treatment related AEs. Conclusion. Curene® results in statistically significant and clinically meaningful reduction in pain, stiffness, and improvement in physical functioning in subjects suffering from knee OA. Curene® also demonstrates excellent safety profile during the study. Trial Registration. This trial is registered with Clinical Trial Registry, India, CTRI/2017/07/009044, registered on 14th July 2017, http://ctri.nic.in/Clinicaltrials/showallp.php?mid1=19264&EncHid=&userName=ocius%20life%20sciences.

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

Symptomatic Treatment With Lanreotide Microparticles in Inoperable Bowel Obstruction Resulting From Peritoneal Carcinomatosis: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Phase III Study

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (35) ◽  
pp. 4337-4343 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pascale Mariani ◽  
Joëlle Blumberg ◽  
Alain Landau ◽  
Daniela Lebrun-Jezekova ◽  
Estelle Botton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Peritoneal Carcinomatosis ◽  
Bowel Obstruction ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Symptomatic Treatment ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Primary Analysis ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Parallel Group ◽  
Intent To Treat

Purpose To investigate the somatostatin analog lanreotide as symptomatic treatment for inoperable bowel obstruction due to peritoneal carcinomatosis. Patients and Methods In all, 80 patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis, inoperable malignant digestive obstruction, and two or more vomiting episodes per day or nasogastric tube (NGT) who were previously treated with intravenous corticosteroids and proton pump inhibitors were randomly assigned to one 30-mg injection of lanreotide microparticles (n = 43) or placebo (n = 37) in a 10-day, double-blind, parallel-group phase. The primary end point was the proportion of patients responding on day 7 (one or fewer episodes of vomiting per day or no vomiting recurrence after NGT removal [for ≥ 3 consecutive days in both cases]). Vomiting frequency/NGT secretion volumes, nausea, abdominal pain, well-being, and safety were also assessed. Patients could then enter an open-label lanreotide-only phase. The study was conducted at 22 European hospitals. Results More patients receiving lanreotide than placebo were responders; this difference was not statistically significant for the intent-to-treat (ITT) population on the basis of diary cards (primary analysis; 41.9% [18 of 43] v 29.7% [11 of 37], respectively; odds ratio, 1.75; 95% CI, 0.68 to 4.49; P = .24) but was statistically significant for the corresponding supportive per protocol analysis (57.7% [15 of 26] v 30.4% [seven of 23]; P < .05) and ITT analysis, on the basis of investigators' assessments (50.0% [19 of 38] v 28.6% [10 of 35]; P < .05). Improvements in well-being were significantly greater with lanreotide on days 3, 6, and 7. No significant differences were observed for other secondary end points. Only two (mild/moderate) treatment-emergent adverse events were considered related to lanreotide. Conclusion These results show that lanreotide has some efficacy and is safe in the symptomatic treatment of patients with inoperable bowel obstruction due to peritoneal carcinomatosis.

Efficacy and Safety of Belimumab in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Phase II, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Dose-ranging Study

2013 ◽  
Vol 40 (5) ◽  
pp. 579-589 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Stohl ◽  
Joan T. Merrill ◽  
James D. McKay ◽  
Jeffrey R. Lisse ◽  
Z. John Zhong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
B Lymphocyte ◽  
Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Acr20 Response ◽  
Link Type ◽  
American College Of Rheumatology

Objective.To evaluate the efficacy/safety of belimumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).Methods.Patients fulfilling American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria for RA for ≥ 1 year who had at least moderate disease activity while receiving stable disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy and failed ≥ 1 DMARD were randomly assigned to placebo or belimumab 1, 4, or 10 mg/kg, administered intravenously on Days 1, 14, and 28, and then every 4 weeks for 24 weeks (n = 283). This was followed by an optional 24-week extension (n = 237) in which all patients received belimumab. Primary efficacy endpoint was the Week 24 ACR20 response.Results.Week 24 ACR20 responses with placebo and belimumab 1, 4, and 10 mg/kg were 15.9%, 34.7% (p = 0.010), 25.4% (p = 0.168), and 28.2% (p = 0.080), respectively. Patients taking any belimumab dose who continued with belimumab in the open-label extension had an ACR20 response of 41% at 48 weeks. A similar ACR20 response (42%) at 48 weeks was seen in patients taking placebo who switched in the extension to belimumab 10 mg/kg. Greater response rates were observed in patients who at baseline were rheumatoid factor-positive, anticitrullinated protein antibody-positive, or tumor necrosis factor inhibitor-naive, or had elevated C-reactive protein levels, Disease Activity Score 28 > 5.1, or low B lymphocyte stimulator levels (< 0.858 ng/ml). Adverse event rates were similar across treatment groups.Conclusion.In this phase II trial, belimumab demonstrated efficacy and was generally well tolerated in patients with RA who had failed previous therapies. [ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00071812]

scholarly journals Subcutaneous Abatacept for the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis: Longterm Data from the ACQUIRE Trial

2014 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 629-639 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark C. Genovese ◽  
César Pacheco Tena ◽  
Arturo Covarrubias ◽  
Gustavo Leon ◽  
Eduardo Mysler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Severe Disease ◽  
Incidence Rates ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Inadequate Response ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
Link Type

Objective.Assess longterm tolerability, safety, and efficacy of subcutaneous (SC) abatacept (ABA) in methotrexate-refractory patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).Methods.The phase III, multinational Abatacept Comparison of Sub[QU]cutaneous Versus Intravenous in Inadequate Responders to MethotrexatE (ACQUIRE) trial comprised a 6-month, randomized, double-blind (DB) period, in which patients received intravenous (IV) or SC ABA, plus MTX, followed by an open-label, longterm extension (LTE), in which patients received SC ABA, 125 mg/week. Safety and efficacy from the LTE (∼3.5 yrs of exposure) are reported.Results.Patients who completed the DB period (1372/1385, 99.1%) entered the LTE; 1134 patients (82.7%) kept taking the treatment at time of reporting. Mean (SD) was 31.9 months (6.8); median (range) exposure was 33.0 (8–44) months. Patients entering the LTE had longstanding, moderate-to-severe disease [mean 7.6 (7.9) yrs and DAS28 (C-reactive protein) 6.2 (0.9)]. Incidence rates (events/100 patient-yrs) were reported for serious adverse events (8.76, 95% CI 7.71, 9.95), infections (44.80, 95% CI 41.76, 48.01), serious infections (1.72, 95% CI 1.30, 2.27), malignancies (1.19, 95% CI 0.86, 1.66), and autoimmune events (1.31, 95% CI 0.95, 1.79). Twenty-seven patients (2%) experienced injection-site reactions; all except 1 were mild. American College of Rheumatology 20, 50, and 70 responses achieved during the DB period were maintained through the LTE, and on Day 981 were 80.2% (95% CI 77.2, 83.2), 63.5% (95% CI 58.2, 68.9), and 39.5% (95% CI 34.0, 44.9) for patients who kept taking SC ABA, and 80.0% (95% CI 77.0, 83.0), 63.2% (95% CI 57.8, 68.7), and 39.2% (95% CI 33.7, 44.7) for those who switched from IV to SC ABA.Conclusion.These findings support SC ABA as a well-tolerated and efficacious longterm treatment for patients with RA and inadequate response to MTX (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00559585).

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 Randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, pilot trial to investigate safety and efficacy of Cerebrolysin in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage

BMC Neurology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Y. M. Woo ◽  
Joanna W. K. Ho ◽  
Natalie M. W. Ko ◽  
Ronald P. T. Li ◽  
Leo Jian ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Subarachnoid Hemorrhage ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage ◽  
Pilot Trial ◽  
Delayed Cerebral Ischemia ◽  
Trial Registration ◽  
Study Group ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Significant Difference

Asbtract Background There are limited neuroprotective treatment options for patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH). Cerebrolysin, a brain-specific proposed pleiotropic neuroprotective agent, has been suggested to improve global functional outcomes in ischemic stroke. We investigated the efficacy, safety and feasibility of administering Cerebrolysin for SAH patients. Methods This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-center, parallel-group pilot study. Fifty patients received either daily Cerebrolysin (30 ml/day) or a placebo (saline) for 14 days (25 patients per study group). The primary endpoint was a favorable Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOSE) of 5 to 8 (moderate disability to good recovery) at six-months. Secondary endpoints included the modified Ranking Scale (mRS), the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA) score, occurrence of adverse effects and the occurrence of delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI). Results No severe adverse effects or mortality attributable to Cerebrolysin were observed. No significant difference was detected in the proportion of patients with favorable six-month GOSE in either study group (odds ratio (OR): 1.49; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.43–5.17). Secondary functional outcome measures for favorable six-month recovery i.e. a mRS of 0 to 3 (OR: 3.45; 95% CI 0.79–15.01) were comparable for both groups. Similarly, there was no difference in MOCA neurocognitive performance (p-value: 0.75) and in the incidence of DCI (OR: 0.85 95% CI: 0.28–2.59). Conclusions Use of Cerebrolysin in addition to standard-of-care management of aneurysmal SAH is safe, well tolerated and feasible. However, the neutral results of this trial suggest that it does not improve the six-month global functional performance of patients. Clinical trial registration Name of Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov Trial Registration Number: NCT01787123. Date of Registration: 8th February 2013.

scholarly journals Effects of the Toll-like receptor 7 (TLR7) agonist, AZD8848, on allergen-induced responses in patients with mild asthma: a double-blind, randomised, parallel-group study

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian R. Leaker ◽  
Dave Singh ◽  
Sam Lindgren ◽  
Gun Almqvist ◽  
Leif Eriksson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Immune System ◽  
Allergic Asthma ◽  
Allergen Challenge ◽  
Forced Expiratory Volume ◽  
Post Treatment ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Parallel Group Study ◽  
Parallel Group ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Th2 Responses

Abstract Background Although allergic asthma is a complex area with many interacting factors involved, the ‘hygiene hypothesis’ proposes that a lack of exposure to infection during childhood may polarise the immune system towards allergen-reactive Th2-type responses in genetically susceptible individuals. Toll-like receptors (TLRs) play a key role within the innate immune system and TLR7 agonists have previously been shown to up-regulate Th1 responses and down-regulate Th2 responses to allergens in murine models of allergic or chronic asthma. This study aimed to examine the efficacy and safety of the novel TRL7 agonist AZD8848, which has been developed as an antedrug. Methods In this double-blind, randomised, parallel-group study, AZD8848 60 μg or placebo was administered intranasally once-weekly for 8 weeks in patients with mild-to-moderate allergic asthma (NCT00999466). Efficacy assessments were performed at 1 and 4 weeks after the last dose. The primary outcome was the late asthmatic response (LAR) fall in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) after allergen challenge at 1-week post-treatment. Results AZD8848 significantly reduced average LAR fall in FEV1 by 27% vs. placebo at 1 week after treatment (p = 0.035). This effect was sustained at 4 weeks post-treatment; however, it did not reach clinical significance. AZD8848 reduced post-allergen challenge methacholine-induced airway hyper-responsiveness (AHR) vs. placebo at 1 week post-dosing (treatment ratio: 2.20, p = 0.024), with no effect at 4 weeks. There was no significant difference between the two groups in plasma cytokine, sputum Th2 cytokine or eosinophil responses post-allergen challenge at 1 week after treatment. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups. AZD8848 was generally well tolerated. Conclusions and clinical relevance In patients with allergic asthma, TLR7 agonists could potentially reduce allergen responsiveness by stimulating Type 1 interferon responses to down-regulate the dominant Th2 responses. Trial registration clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT00999466.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document