scholarly journals Pegloticase in combination with methotrexate in patients with uncontrolled gout: A multicenter, open-label study (MIRROR)

2020 ◽  
pp. jrheum.200460 ◽  
Author(s):  
John K. Botson ◽  
John R.P. Tesser ◽  
Ralph Bennett ◽  
Howard M. Kenney ◽  
Paul M. Peloso ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Primary Study ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Safety Study ◽  
Open Label Study ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Intent To Treat ◽  
Treat Population

Objective To examine the efficacy and safety of pegloticase in combination with methotrexate in patients with uncontrolled gout in an exploratory, open-label clinical trial (NCT03635957) prior to a randomized, controlled trial. Methods A multicenter, open-label, efficacy and safety study of pegloticase with methotrexate cotreatment was conducted in patients with uncontrolled gout. Patients were administered oral methotrexate (15 mg/week) and folic acid (1 mg/day) 4 weeks prior to and throughout pegloticase treatment. The primary study outcome was the proportion of responders, defined as sUA <6 mg/dL for ≥80% of the time during month 6 (weeks 20, 22, and 24). All analyses were performed on a modified intent-to-treat population, defined as patients who received ≥1 pegloticase infusion. Results Seventeen patients were screened and 14 patients (all men, average age: 49.3 ± 8.7 years) were enrolled. On Day 1, mean sUA was 9.2 ± 2.5 mg/dL and 12 of the 14 patients had visible tophi. At the 6 month timepoint, 11/14 (78.6%, 95%CI 49.2-95.3%) met the responder definition, with 3 patients discontinuing after meeting protocol-defined treatment discontinuation rules (pre-infusion sUA values greater than 6 mg/dL at 2 consecutive scheduled visits). All patients tolerated methotrexate. No new safety concerns were identified. Conclusion In this study, an increased proportion of patients maintained therapeutic response at 6 months when treated concomitantly with methotrexate and pegloticase when compared to the previously reported 42% using pegloticase alone. These results support the need for a randomized study of methotrexate or placebo with pegloticase to validate these open label findings.

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of artesunate-amodiaquine and artemether-lumefantrine and prevalence of molecular markers associated with resistance, Guinea: an open-label two-arm randomized controlled trial

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdoul Habib Beavogui ◽  
Alioune Camara ◽  
Alexandre Delamou ◽  
Abdoulaye Doumbouya ◽  
Karifa Kourouma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Molecular Markers ◽  
Treatment Failure ◽  
Uncomplicated Malaria ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Artemisinin Resistance ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Kaplan Meier

Abstract ​ Background: Antimalarial resistance is a threat to recent gains in malaria control. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of artesunate-amodiaquine (ASAQ) and artemether-lumefantrine (AL) in the management of uncomplicated malaria and to measure the prevalence of molecular markers of resistance of Plasmodium falciparum in sentinel sites in Maferinyah and Labé Health Districts in Guinea in 2016. Methods: This was a two-arm randomized controlled trial of the efficacy of AL and ASAQ among children aged 6-59 months with uncomplicated P. falciparum malaria in two sites. Children were followed for 28 days to assess clinical and parasitological response. The primary outcome was the Kaplan-Meier estimate of Day 28 (D28) efficacy after correction by microsatellite-genotyping. Pre-treatment (D0) and day of failure samples were assayed for molecular markers of resistance in the pfk13 and pfmdr1 genes. Results: A total of 421 participants were included with 211 participants in the Maferinyah site and 210 in Labé. No early treatment failure was observed in any study arms. However, 22 (5.3%) participants developed a late treatment failure (8 in the ASAQ arm and 14 in the AL arm), which were further classified as 2 recrudescences and 20 reinfections. The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the corrected efficacy at D28 was 100% for both AL and ASAQ in Maferinyah site and 99% (95% Confidence Interval: 97.2-100%) for ASAQ and 99% (97.1-100%) for AL in Labé. The majority of successfully analyzed D0 (98%, 380/389) and all day of failure (100%, 22/22) samples were wild type for pfk13 . All 9 observed pfk13 mutations were polymorphisms not associated with artemisinin resistance. The NFD haplotype was the predominant haplotype in both D0 (197/362, 54%) and day of failure samples (11/18, 61%) successfully analyzed for pfmdr1 . Vomiting was the most common observed side effect (14%) across all arms. Conclusions: This study observed high efficacy and safety of both ASAQ and AL in Guinea, providing evidence for their continued use to treat uncomplicated malaria. Continued monitoring of ACT efficacy and safety and molecular makers of resistance in Guinea is important to detect emergence of parasite resistance and to inform evidence-based malaria treatment policies.

scholarly journals The Efficacy and Safety of Eravacycline in the Treatment of Complicated Intra-Abdominal Infections: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (6) ◽  
pp. 866 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shao-Huan Lan ◽  
Shen-Peng Chang ◽  
Chih-Cheng Lai ◽  
Li-Chin Lu ◽  
Chien-Ming Chao
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Event ◽  
Clinical Cure ◽  
Clinical Cure Rate ◽  
Clinical Failure ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Cure Rate ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Evaluable Population ◽  
Intent To Treat ◽  
Treat Population

This study aims to assess the clinical efficacy and safety of eravacycline for treating complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI) in adult patients. The PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCO, Cochrane databases, Ovid Medline, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched up to May 2019. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated eravacycline and other comparators for the treatment of cIAI were included. The primary outcome was the clinical cure rate at the test-of-cure visit based on modified intent-to-treat population, microbiological intent-to-treat population, clinically evaluable population, and microbiological evaluable population, and the secondary outcomes were clinical failure rate and the risk of adverse event. Three RCTs were included. Overall, eravacycline had a clinical cure rate (88.7%, 559/630) at test-of-cure in modified intent-to-treat population similar to comparators (90.1%, 492/546) in the treatment of cIAIs (risk ratio (RR), 0.99; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.95–1.03; I2 = 0%, Figure 3). In the microbiological intent-to-treat, clinically evaluable, and microbiological evaluable populations, no difference was found between eravacycline and comparators in terms of clinical cure rate at test-of-cure (microbiological intent-to-treat population, RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.95–1.04; I2 = 0%, clinically evaluable population, RR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.97–1.03; I2 = 0%, microbiological evaluable population, RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.95–1.02; I2 = 0%). In addition, eravacycline had clinical failure rate similar to comparators at test-of-cure in modified intent-to-treat population (RR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.61–0.69; I2 = 0%), microbiological intent-to-treat population (RR, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.77–2.31; I2 = 16%), clinically evaluable population (RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.61–1.76; I2 = 0%), and microbiological evaluable population (RR, 1.32; 95% CI, 0.75–2.32; I2 = 10%). Although eravacycline was associated with higher risk of treatment-emergent adverse event than comparators (RR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.13–1.58; I2 = 0%), no significant differences were found between eravacycline and comparators for the risk of serious adverse event (RR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.65–1.65; I2 = 0%), discontinuation of study drug because of adverse event (RR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.23–1.99; I2 = 13%), and all-cause mortality (RR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.41–2.9; I2 = 28%). In conclusion, the clinical efficacy of eravacycline is as high as that of the comparator drugs in the treatment of cIAIs and this antibiotic is as well tolerated as the comparators.

Effect of Cotherapy Reduction on Tolerability of Epilepsy Add-On Therapy: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2005 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 418-423 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dean K Naritoku ◽  
Joseph F Hulihan ◽  
Lesley Kraut Schwarzman ◽  
Marc Kamin ◽  
William H Olson
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Dose Group ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Fixed Dose ◽  
Primary Study ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Open Label Study ◽  
Effective Doses ◽  
Receive Treatment ◽  
To Receive

BACKGROUND: Adverse effects are the most common cause for failure of an antiepileptic drug (AED), especially when an AED is added to existing therapy. With the increased drug load, it may not be possible to titrate the newly added AED to effective doses. Reducing the dosage of AED cotherapy as the new drug is introduced may improve tolerability. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate reduction of AED cotherapy as a strategy to improve tolerability and patient retention when a new AED is added to existing therapy. METHODS: In a 20-week, randomized, open-label study, topiramate was initiated as add-on therapy in adults and adolescents (⩾12 y of age) with inadequately controlled partial-onset seizures. Patients were randomized to receive treatment in which adverse events could be managed by adjustments in AED cotherapy (flex-dose group) or treatment in which AED cotherapy dosages remained fixed (fixed-dose group). Topiramate could be adjusted as needed in both groups. In the flex-dose group, patients exited randomized treatment when topiramate was discontinued. In the fixed-dose group, patients exited when AED cotherapy was reduced due to adverse events or when topiramate was discontinued. The primary study outcome was the percentage of patients exiting randomized treatment due to adverse events. RESULTS: The flex-dose group comprised 297 patients; 302 patients were in the fixed-dose group. Significantly fewer patients in the flex-dose group exited the study due to adverse events (16% vs 23% in the fixed-dose group; p = 0.02). In the flex-dose group, 10% (17 of 168) of patients discontinued topiramate due to adverse events after AED cotherapy was reduced versus 22% (29 of 129) when AED cotherapy was not reduced. CONCLUSIONS: Reduction of AED cotherapy is a useful strategy to improve tolerability and retention when topiramate is initiated as adjunctive therapy.

scholarly journals Convalescent plasma for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and the effect of plasma antibodies: a randomized controlled, open-label trial

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philippe Bégin ◽  
Jeannie Callum ◽  
Erin Jamulae Jamula ◽  
Richard Cook ◽  
Nancy M Heddle ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Harmful Effect ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Hospitalized Patients ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Negative Results ◽  
Intent To Treat

The efficacy of convalescent plasma for COVID-19 is unclear. While most randomized controlled trials have shown negative results, uncontrolled studies have suggested that the antibody content may influence patient outcomes. We conducted an open-label, randomized controlled trial of convalescent plasma for adults with COVID-19 receiving oxygen within 12 days of respiratory symptom onset. Patients were allocated 2:1 to 500 mL of convalescent plasma or standard of care. The composite primary outcome was intubation or death by 30 days. The effect of convalescent plasma antibodies on the primary outcome was assessed by logistic regression. The trial was terminated at 78% of planned enrollment after meeting stopping criteria for futility. 940 patients were randomized and 921 patients were included in the intent-to-treat analysis. Intubation or death occurred in 199/614 (32.4%) in the convalescent plasma arm and 86/307 (28.0%) in the standard of care arm; relative risk (RR) 1.16 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94-1.43; p=0.18). Patients in the convalescent plasma arm had more serious adverse events (33.4% vs. 26.4%; RR=1.27, 95% CI 1.02-1.57, p=0.034). The antibody content significantly modulated the therapeutic effect of convalescent plasma. In multivariate analysis, each standard log increase in neutralization or antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity independently reduced the potential harmful effect of plasma (OR=0.74; 0.57-0.95 and OR=0.66; 0.50-0.87, respectively), while IgG against the full transmembrane Spike protein increased it (OR=1.53, 95% CI 1.14-2.05). Convalescent plasma did not reduce the risk of intubation or death at 30 days among hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Transfusion of convalescent plasma with unfavourable antibody profiles may be associated with worse clinical outcomes compared to standard care.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document