Non-inferiority Trial Research Articles

Acupuncture for Residual Dizziness After Successful Repositioning Maneuvers in Patients with Benign Paroxysmal Positional Vertigo: Study Protocol for a Randomized Noninferiority Trial.

Benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV) is the most common cause of peripheral vertigo among adults. Successful treatment often requires an appropriate canalith repositioning procedure (CRP), which has proven effective in the treatment of BPPV. However, some patients experience residual dizziness (RD) after CRP, affecting their daily activities and quality of life. Although oral betahistine is a common clinical treatment for RD, some patients may discontinue this medication due to adverse effects. Conversely, acupuncture has demonstrated efficacy in treating dizziness with minimal adverse effects. However, to date, no trials have directly compared the efficacy of acupuncture and betahistine in treating RD. Our goal was to assess the noninferiority of acupuncture in treating RD compared with the commonly used oral betahistine treatment. A randomized, controlled, non-inferiority trial was conducted to compare the effectiveness of acupuncture and betahistine in patients with BPPV who experience RD after a successful CRP. Eighty-four participants were randomly assigned to two treatment groups, each receiving either acupuncture or betahistine. The assessors and statisticians were blinded to treatment allocation. The primary outcomes were the response rate and change in vertigo level, and secondary outcomes included Visual Analog Scores and the presence and change in depressive symptoms among patients. Scale measures were recorded at baseline, 2, 4, and 12 weeks after randomization. This trial aims to provide causal evidence supporting the non-inferiority of acupuncture therapy relative to oral betahistine, offering an alternative treatment avenue for patients intolerant to betahistine. Ethics approval was obtained from the Affiliated Hospital of Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, with permission number 2023-095-KY. Written informed consent was obtained from the enrolled patients.

Vitamin K Antagonist Reversal for Urgent Surgery Using 4-Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrates

Millions of people take vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). Some people who need urgent surgical procedures require rapid VKA reversal to prevent excessive intraoperative bleeding. To evaluate the hemostatic noninferiority of an investigational 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) to a control 4F-PCC for rapid VKA reversal before urgent surgery. This phase 3, double-blind, noninferiority randomized clinical trial (LEX-209) was conducted in 24 hospitals in the US, Russia, Georgia, Belarus, Ukraine, and Romania from June 7, 2017, through November 8, 2021; the study was stopped in February 2022. Participants were adult patients taking VKA who had an international normalized ratio (INR) of 2 or higher and needed urgent surgery with a substantial bleeding risk (≥50 mL). Patients were randomized 1:1 to a single infusion of either the investigational 4F-PCC or the control 4F-PCC. Data analysis followed intention-to-treat and per-protocol approaches. Single intravenous infusion was dosed by body weight and baseline INR. A dose of 25, 35, or 50 IU/kg of investigational 4F-PCC or control 4F-PCC was administered for baseline INR of 2 to less than 4, 4 to 6, or over 6, respectively. The primary end point was hemostatic efficacy at surgery end. An independent adjudication board, blinded to the 4F-PCC treatment allocation, assessed hemostatic efficacy using an objective 4-point scale. A total of 208 patients (median [range] age, 67.5 [31-92] years; 118 males [56.7%]) received the investigational (n = 105) or the control (n = 103) 4F-PCC. The median (range) dose was 25 (16-50) IU/kg in the investigational group and 25 (15-50) IU/kg in the control group, with a median (range) infusion time of 12 (8-50) minutes and 13 (7-30) minutes and a median (range) time from infusion to surgery start of 1.42 (0.25-15.25) hours and 1.50 (0.42-18.50) hours, respectively. Baseline median (range) INR was 3.05 (1.97-21.10) in the investigational group and 3.00 (2.00-11.30) in the control group. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the investigational 4F-PCC was noninferior to the control 4F-PCC, resulting in effective hemostasis in 94.3% of patients vs 94.2% of patients (proportion difference, 0.001; 95% CI, -0.080 to 0.082; P < .001), meeting the prespecified noninferiority margin of 0.15. An INR of 1.5 or lower at 30 minutes after infusion occurred in 78.1% of patients in the investigational group vs 71.8% of patients in the control group (proportion difference, 0.063; 95% CI, -0.056 to 0.181). Thrombotic events (2.9% vs 0%, respectively) and mortality (4.8% vs 1.0%, respectively) were no different than expected for 4F-PCC use. One patient in each treatment group discontinued due to adverse events (cardiac disorders unrelated to 4F-PCC). This randomized clinical trial found that the investigational 4F-PCC was hemostatically noninferior to the control 4F-PCC for rapid VKA reversal in patients needing urgent surgery with considerable bleeding risk; the safety profile of these two 4F-PCCs was similar. These results support the investigational 4F-PCC as a therapeutic option for surgical patients requiring rapid VKA reversal. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02740335.

PEACE-HYPNO – Management of procedural pain by multimodal sedation analgesia combining hypnosis in children with congenital heart disease: A randomized trial of non-inferiority

PEACE-HYPNO – Management of procedural pain by multimodal sedation analgesia combining hypnosis in children with congenital heart disease: A randomized trial of non-inferiority

Efficacy and safety of standard BEACOPP regimen versus ABVD regimen for treatment of advanced Hodgkin's lymphoma.

The current treatment regimens for Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL) are associated with high incidences of adverse events. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of doxorubicin + bleomycin + vincristine + dacarbazine (ABVD) and standard bleomycin + etoposide + doxorubicin + cyclophosphamide + vincristine + procarbazine + prednisone (BEACOPP) chemotherapy in the treatment of advanced stage HL. This multicenter, randomized, parallel, open, positive control noninferiority trial was conducted from 2016 to 2019 and comprised 93 subjects who were randomized in a 1:1 ratio between the treatment (BEACOPP; n = 44) and control (ABVD; n = 49) groups. The primary efficacy endpoint of this trial was the objective response rate (ORR) after eight cycles of chemotherapy, which was 100.00% (36/36) in the treatment group and 95.74% (45/49) in the control group. The incidence of adverse reactions was 100% in both groups. Significant differences (P < 0.05) in the incidences of grade 3 (39/44 [88.64%] vs. 23/49 [46.94%]) and grade 4 (27/44 [61.36%] vs. 8/49 [16.94%]) adverse events were observed between the treatment and control groups, respectively. However, most of these reactions were manageable, with no serious consequences, and were reversible after discontinuation of the treatment. Both regimens had a similar ORR and were associated with a high number of adverse events. The ABVD regimen was better tolerated and safer than the standard BEACOPP regimen. This study indicates that the standard BEACOPP regimen may be considered as a treatment option for patients with advanced HL.

Recurrence of Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer With Visceral Pleural Invasion

The randomized clinical trial Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 140503 showed that for patients with clinically staged T1N0 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC; ≤2 cm), sublobar resections were associated with similar oncological outcomes to those after lobar resection. The association of the extent of parenchymal resection with recurrence and survival in patients with tumors pathologically upstaged to T2 based on visceral pleural invasion (VPI) is controversial. To determine survival and recurrence rates in patients with small peripheral pT2 NSCLC (≤2 cm) that was treated by either lobar or sublobar resection in CALGB 140503. CALGB 140503, a randomized multicenter noninferiority trial, included 697 patients with small peripheral NSCLC that was clinically staged as T1N0. Enrollment was from June 2007 through March 2017 at 83 participating institutions, and after a median follow-up of 7 years, the primary outcome of disease-free survival after sublobar resection was noninferior to that after lobar resection. Lobar or sublobar resection. Survival end points were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier estimator. Hazard ratios and 95% CIs were estimated using stratified Cox proportional hazard models. Of 679 participants, 390 (57.4%) were female, and the median (range) age was 67.8 (37.8-89.7) years. Among 697 patients randomized, 566 (81.2%) had pT1 tumors (no VPI) and 113 (16.2%) had pT2 tumors (VPI). Five-year disease-free survival was 65.9% (95% CI, 61.9%-70.2%) in patients with pT1 compared with 53.3% (95% CI, 44.3%-64.1%) in patients with pT2 tumors (stratified log-rank: P = .02). Disease recurrence developed in 27.6% of patients with pT1 (locoregional only: 60 [10.8%]; distant only: 81 [14.6%]) and 41.6% of those with pT2 (locoregional only: 17 [15.0%]; distant only: 27 [23.9%]). Five-year recurrence-free survival was 73.1% (95% CI, 69.2%-77.1%) for pT1 tumors and 58.2% (95% CI, 49.2%-68.8%) for pT2 tumors (stratified log-rank: P = .01). There were no intergroup differences in disease-free or recurrence-free survival based on the extent of parenchymal resection. The results of this secondary analysis suggest that compared with patients with tumors without VPI, patients who had tumors with VPI had worse disease-free and recurrence-free survival and a higher rate of local and distant disease recurrence. These high rates of recurrence were independent of the extent of parenchymal resection, and these data support the inclusion of these patients in adjuvant therapy trials. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0049933.

Temporary treatment cessation compared with continuation of tyrosine kinase inhibitors for adults with renal cancer: the STAR non-inferiority RCT.

There is interest in using treatment breaks in oncology, to reduce toxicity without compromising efficacy. A Phase II/III multicentre, open-label, parallel-group, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial assessing treatment breaks in patients with renal cell carcinoma. Patients with locally advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma, starting tyrosine kinase inhibitor as first-line treatment at United Kingdom National Health Service hospitals. At trial entry, patients were randomised (1 : 1) to a drug-free interval strategy or a conventional continuation strategy. After 24 weeks of treatment with sunitinib/pazopanib, drug-free interval strategy patients took up a treatment break until disease progression with additional breaks dependent on disease response and patient choice. Conventional continuation strategy patients continued on treatment. Both trial strategies continued until treatment intolerance, disease progression on treatment, withdrawal or death. To determine if a drug-free interval strategy is non-inferior to a conventional continuation strategy in terms of the co-primary outcomes of overall survival and quality-adjusted life-years. For non-inferiority to be concluded, a margin of ≤ 7.5% in overall survival and ≤ 10% in quality-adjusted life-years was required in both intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses. This equated to the 95% confidence interval of the estimates being above 0.812 and -0.156, respectively. Quality-adjusted life-years were calculated using the utility index of the EuroQol-5 Dimensions questionnaire. Nine hundred and twenty patients were randomised (461 conventional continuation strategy vs. 459 drug-free interval strategy) from 13 January 2012 to 12 September 2017. Trial treatment and follow-up stopped on 31 December 2020. Four hundred and eighty-eight (53.0%) patients [240 (52.1%) vs. 248 (54.0%)] continued on trial post week 24. The median treatment-break length was 87 days. Nine hundred and nineteen patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis (461 vs. 458) and 871 patients in the per-protocol analysis (453 vs. 418). For overall survival, non-inferiority was concluded in the intention-to-treat analysis but not in the per-protocol analysis [hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) intention to treat 0.97 (0.83 to 1.12); per-protocol 0.94 (0.80 to 1.09) non-inferiority margin: 95% confidence interval ≥ 0.812, intention to treat: 0.83 > 0.812 non-inferior, per-protocol: 0.80 < 0.812 not non-inferior]. Therefore, a drug-free interval strategy was not concluded to be non-inferior to a conventional continuation strategy in terms of overall survival. For quality-adjusted life-years, non-inferiority was concluded in both the intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses [marginal effect (95% confidence interval) intention to treat -0.05 (-0.15 to 0.05); per-protocol 0.04 (-0.14 to 0.21) non-inferiority margin: 95% confidence interval ≥ -0.156]. Therefore, a drug-free interval strategy was concluded to be non-inferior to a conventional continuation strategy in terms of quality-adjusted life-years. The main limitation of the study is the fewer than expected overall survival events, resulting in lower power for the non-inferiority comparison. Future studies should investigate treatment breaks with more contemporary treatments for renal cell carcinoma. Non-inferiority was shown for the quality-adjusted life-year end point but not for overall survival as pre-defined. Nevertheless, despite not meeting the primary end point of non-inferiority as per protocol, the study suggested that a treatment-break strategy may not meaningfully reduce life expectancy, does not reduce quality of life and has economic benefits. Although the treating clinicians' perspectives were not formally collected, the fact that clinicians recruited a large number of patients over a long period suggests support for the study and provides clear evidence that a treatment-break strategy for patients with renal cell carcinoma receiving tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy is feasible. This trial is registered as ISRCTN06473203. This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment Programme (NIHR award ref: 09/91/21) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 45. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Percutaneous Achilles tendon tenotomy in clubfoot with a blade or a needle: a single-centre randomized controlled noninferiority trial.

The gold standard for percutaneous Achilles tendon tenotomy during the Ponseti treatment for idiopathic clubfoot is a tenotomy with a No. 15 blade. This trial aims to establish the technique where the tenotomy is performed with a large-bore needle as noninferior to the gold standard. We randomized feet from children aged below 36 months with idiopathic clubfoot on a 1:1 basis in either the blade or needle group. Follow-up was conducted at three weeks and three months postoperatively, where dorsiflexion range, Pirani scores, and complications were recorded. The noninferiority margin was set at 4° difference in dorsiflexion range at three months postoperatively. The blade group had more dorsiflexion at both follow-up consultations: 18.36° versus 18.03° (p = 0.115) at three weeks and 18.96° versus 18.26° (p = 0.001) at three months. The difference of the mean at three months 0.7° is well below the noninferiority margin of 4°. There was no significant difference in Pirani scores. The blade group had more extensive scar marks at three months than the needle group (8 vs 2). No major complications were recorded. The needle tenotomy is noninferior to the blade tenotomy for usage in Ponseti treatment for idiopathic clubfoot in children aged below 36 months.

Comparison of low-dose ketamine to methadone for postoperative pain in opioid addicts: a randomized clinical trial.

Postoperative pain can lead to several complications. The effectiveness of different opioids in relieving pain after surgery has been widely studied. However, managing pain in patients with opioid addiction is still challenging. This study aimed to examine the impact of ketamine and methadone on postoperative pain in patients with addiction. This was a non-inferiority randomized clinical trial. All included patients were monitored for morphine use, pain scores, and vital signs every 3 h. The intervention group received 0.5 mg/kg ketamine administered intravenously every 6 h. The control group received 5 mg of methadone intramuscularly every 8 h. The patient received intravenous morphine if their visual analog scale was above 3. All side effects in each group were recorded. Two hundred and twenty patients were included in this study. There were 127 men (57.7%) with an average age of 57.1 ± 19.5 and 93 women (42.3%) with an average age of 57.1 ± 21.0. There were no significant differences in demographic characteristics between the groups. There was no significant difference in the dose or frequency of morphine administration between groups. There was no significant difference between the groups in pain scores and vital signs at different time points. Drug side effects, including delirium and gastrointestinal symptoms, did not differ significantly between the methadone and ketamine groups. Our clinical data support the hypothesis that ketamine is not inferior to methadone in patients with addiction. Future randomize clinical trials are needed to confirm these observations.

Evaluation of a Musculoskeletal Digital Assessment Routing Tool (DART): Crossover Noninferiority Randomized Pilot Trial.

Musculoskeletal conditions account for 16% of global disability, resulting in a negative effect on patients and increasing demand for health care use. Triage directing patients to appropriate level intervention improving health outcomes and efficiency has been prioritized. We developed a musculoskeletal digital assessment routing tool (DART) mobile health (mHealth) system, which requires evaluation prior to implementation. Such innovations are rarely rigorously tested in clinical trials-considered the gold standard for evaluating safety and efficacy. This pilot study is a precursor to a trial assessing DART performance with a physiotherapist-led triage assessment. The study aims to evaluate trial design, assess procedures, and collect exploratory data to establish the feasibility of delivering an adequately powered, definitive randomized trial, assessing DART safety and efficacy in an NHS primary care setting. A crossover, noninferiority pilot trial using an integrated knowledge translation approach within a National Health Service England primary care setting. Participants were patients seeking assessment for a musculoskeletal condition, completing a DART assessment and the history-taking element of a face-to-face physiotherapist-led triage in a randomized order. The primary outcome was agreement between DART and physiotherapist triage recommendation. Data allowed analysis of participant recruitment and retention, randomization, blinding, study burden, and potential barriers to intervention delivery. Participant satisfaction was measured using the System Usability Scale. Over 8 weeks, 129 patients were invited to participate. Of these, 92% (119/129) proceeded to eligibility assessment, with 60% (78/129) meeting the inclusion criteria and being randomized into each intervention arm (39/39). There were no dropouts and data were analyzed for all 78 participants. Agreement between physiotherapist and DART across all participants and all primary triage outcomes was 41% (32/78; 95% CI 22-45), intraclass correlation coefficient 0.37 (95% CI 0.16-0.55), indicating that the reliability of DART was poor to moderate. Feedback from the clinical service team led to an adjusted analysis yielding of 78% (61/78; 95% CI 47-78) and an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.57 (95% CI 0.40-0.70). Participant satisfaction was measured quantitively using amalgamated System Usability Scale scores (n=78; mean score 84.0; 90% CI +2.94 to -2.94), equating to an "excellent" system. There were no study incidents, and the trial burden was acceptable. Physiotherapist-DART agreement of 78%, with no adverse triage decisions and high patient satisfaction, was sufficient to conclude DART had the potential to improve the musculoskeletal pathway. Study validity was enhanced by the recruitment of real-world patients and using an integrated knowledge translation approach. Completion of a context-specific consensus process is recommended to provide definitive definitions of safety criteria, range of appropriateness, noninferiority margin, and sample size. This pilot demonstrated an adequately powered definitive trial is feasible, which would provide evidence of DART safety and efficacy, ultimately informing potential for DART implementation. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04904029; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04904029. RR2-10.2196/31541.

A phase III, multicentre, randomised, investigator-masked, cross-over, comparative, non-inferiority trial evaluating the efficacy and tolerability of generic preservative-free Latanoprost (Polpharma S.A.) compared to Xalatan® (Pfizer) in patients with ocular hypertension or primary open-angle glaucoma

BackgroundPrimary open-angle glaucoma (POAG), often associated with increased intraocular pressure (IOP), can lead to permanent damage of the optic nerve, concomitant visual field loss, and blindness. Latanoprost, a prostaglandin F2α analogue, reduces IOP and is used to treat glaucoma. In this clinical trial, we evaluated the efficacy of Latanoprost Polpharma, a generic preservative-free latanoprost 0.05 mg/ml eye drops solution, in lowering IOP when compared to the originator Xalatan® (latanoprost 0.005% ophthalmic solution, Pfizer).MethodsThis was a Phase III, multicentre, randomized, investigator-masked, cross-over, comparative, non-inferiority trial carried out in 5 sites in Hungary and Russia. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the non-inferiority of the test product when compared to the reference product with respect to the differences in the mean diurnal IOP on Day 1 (baseline) and Day 29. The secondary endpoints included efficacy, ocular tolerance, safety, and usability. We recruited adult patients (18–75 years) with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension.ResultsForty-nine patients were randomised and received at least one dose of the test or reference product. A virtually identical reduction of the mean diurnal IOP of 7.04 ± 2.14 mmHg or 7.17 ± 2.11 mmHg was found after treatment with test or reference product, respectively (N = 44). In the intention to treat analysis, the reduction was 7.29 ± 2.53 mmHg (95% CI: 6.55–8.04) or 7.43 ± 2.78 mm Hg (95%CI: 6.61–8.24) after treatment with test or reference product, respectively (N = 47). There were no serious adverse events.ConclusionsLatanoprost Polpharma was shown to be non-inferior to Xalatan®. Both investigational products were equally well tolerated and safe. The data show a trend in favour of the test product with regards to the severity of hyperaemia and to the velocity of remission of ocular discomfort. Latanoprost Polpharma, being preservative-free, also avoids the cytotoxicity of benzalkonium chloride, the side effects of which may affect patient compliance and lower the quality of life.Trial registrationThe study had the ethical and regulatory approval from the National Institute of Pharmacy and Nutrition (OGYEI, OGYEI/41,779- 11/2018) and the Ethics Committee for Clinical Pharmacology (KFEB) of Hungary and from the Ministry of Healthcare of the Russian Federation (MOH of Russia) prior to the beginning of the study (642/25.12.2018) (clinical trial identification number: 848,300,144/0103/1 - POP03; IND number/EudraCT number: 2018-001727-39).

Challenges in designing a randomized, double-blind noninferiority trial for treatment of acne: The SD-ACNE trial.

Excessive use of antibiotics has led to development of antibiotic resistance and other antibiotic-associated complications. Dermatologists prescribe more antibiotics per clinician than any other major specialty, with much of this use for acne. Alternative acne treatments are available but are used much less often than antibiotics, at least partially because dermatologists feel that they are less effective. Spironolactone, a hormonal therapy with antiandrogen effects that can address the hormonal pathogenesis of acne, may represent a therapeutic alternative to oral antibiotics for women with acne. However, the comparative effects of spironolactone and oral antibiotics in the treatment of acne have not been definitively studied. The Spironolactone versus Doxycycline for Acne: A Comparative Effectiveness, Noninferiority Evaluation (SD-ACNE) trial aims to answer whether spironolactone, in addition to standard topical therapy, is noninferior to doxycycline (an oral antibiotic) for women with acne. Several interesting challenges arose in the development of this study, including determining acceptability of the comparative regimens to participating dermatologists, identifying data to support a noninferiority margin, and establishing a process for unblinding participants after they completed the study while maintaining the blind for study investigators. We present the scientific and clinical rationale for the decisions made in the design of the trial, including input from key stakeholders through a Delphi consensus process. The Spironolactone versus Doxycycline for Acne: A Comparative Effectiveness, Noninferiority Evaluation trial (NCT04582383) is being conducted at a range of community and academic sites in the United States. To maximize external validity and inform clinical practice, the study is designed with broad eligibility criteria and no prohibition of use of topical medications. Participants in the trial will be randomized to receive either spironolactone 100 mg/day or doxycycline hyclate 100 mg/day for 16 weeks. The primary outcome is the absolute decrease in inflammatory lesion count, and we have established a noninferiority margin of four inflammatory lesions. Secondary outcomes include the percentage of participants achieving Investigator Global Assessment success, change in quality of life, and microbiome changes and diversity. The Spironolactone versus Doxycycline for Acne: A Comparative Effectiveness, Noninferiority Evaluation trial will have substantial implications for the treatment of acne and antibiotic stewardship. In addition, this study will provide important information on the effect of these systemic agents on the development of changes to the microbiome and antibiotic resistance in a healthy population of patients.

The SMILE study: Study of long-term methotrexate and iguratimod combination therapy in early rheumatoid arthritis.

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a systemic autoimmune disease characterized by chronic inflammation and joint destruction. Iguratimod (IGU) is a novel conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARD) with good efficacy and safety for the treatment of active RA in China and Japan. However, the long-term effects of IGU on the progression of bone destruction or radiographic progression in patients with active RA remain unknown. We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of iguratimod (IGU), a combination of methotrexate (MTX) and IGU, and IGU in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who were naïve to MTX. This multicenter, double-blind, randomized, non-inferiority clinical trial was conducted at 28 centers for over 52weeks in China. In total, 911 patients were randomized (1:1:1) to receive MTX monotherapy (10-15mg weekly, n=293), IGU monotherapy (25mg twice daily, n=297), or IGU+MTX (10-15mg weekly for MTX and 25mg twice daily for IGU, n=305) for 52weeks. The patients' clinical characteristics, Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI), Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), disease activity score in 28 joints-C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) level, and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR) were assessed at baseline. The primary endpoints were the proportion of patients with≥20% improvement according to the American College of Rheumatology (ACR20) response and changes in the van der Heijde-modified total Sharp score (vdH-mTSS) at week 52. The proportions of patients achieving an ACR20 response at week 52 were 77.44%, 77.05 %, and 65.87% for IGU monotherapy, IGU + MTX, and MTX monotherapy, respectively. The non-inferiority of IGU monotherapy to MTX monotherapy was established with the ACR20 (11.57%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.35-18.79%; P<0.001) and vdH-mTSS (-0.37; 95% CI, -1.22-0.47; P=0.022). IGU monotherapy was also superior to MTX monotherapy in terms of ACR20 (P=0.002) but not the vdH-mTSS. The superiority of IGU+MTX over MTX monotherapy was confirmed in terms of the ACR20 (11.18%; 95% CI, 3.99-18.37%; P=0.003), but not in the vdH-mTSS (-0.68; 95% CI, -1.46-0.11; P=0.091). However, the difference in the incidence rates of adverse events was not statistically significant. IGU monotherapy/IGU+MTX showed a more favorable clinical response than did MTX monotherapy. IGU may have some clinical benefits over MTX in terms of radiographic progression, implying that IGU may be considered as an initial therapeutic option for patients with active RA. https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/, NCT01548001.

Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy Compared with Anterior Cervical Discectomy with Fusion for Cervical Radiculopathy: Two-Year Results of the FACET Randomized Noninferiority Study.

Posterior cervical foraminotomy (posterior surgery) is a valid alternative to anterior discectomy with fusion (anterior surgery) as a surgical treatment of cervical radiculopathy, but the quality of evidence has been limited. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcome of these treatments after 2 years of follow-up. We hypothesized that posterior surgery would be noninferior to anterior surgery. This multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial assessed patients with single-level cervical radiculopathy in 9 Dutch hospitals with a follow-up duration of 2 years. The primary outcomes measured reduction of cervical radicular pain and were the success ratio based on the Odom criteria, and arm pain and decrease in arm pain, evaluated with the visual analog scale, with a 10% noninferiority margin, which represents the maximum acceptable difference between the new treatment (posterior surgery) and the standard treatment (anterior surgery), beyond which the new treatment would be considered clinically unacceptable. The secondary outcomes were neck pain, Neck Disability Index, Work Ability Index, quality of life, complications (including reoperations), and treatment satisfaction. Generalized linear mixed effects modeling was used for analyses. The study was registered at the Overview of Medical Research in the Netherlands (OMON), formerly the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR5536). From January 2016 to May 2020, 265 patients were randomized (132 to the posterior surgery group and 133 to the anterior surgery group). Among these, 25 did not have the allocated intervention; 11 of these 25 patients had symptom improvement, and the rest of the patients did not have the intervention due to various reasons. At the 2-year follow-up, of 243 patients, primary outcome data were available for 236 patients (97%). Predicted proportions of a successful outcome were 0.81 after posterior surgery and 0.74 after anterior surgery (difference in rate, -0.06 [1-sided 95% confidence interval (CI), -0.02]), indicating the noninferiority of posterior surgery. The between-group difference in arm pain was -2.7 (1-sided 95% CI, 7.4) and the between-group difference in the decrease in arm pain was 1.5 (1-sided 95% CI, 8.2), both confirming the noninferiority of posterior surgery. The secondary outcomes demonstrated small between-group differences. Serious surgery-related adverse events occurred in 9 patients (8%) who underwent posterior surgery, including 9 reoperations, and 11 patients (9%) who underwent anterior surgery, including 7 reoperations (difference in reoperation rate, -0.02 [2-sided 95% CI, -0.09 to 0.05]). This trial demonstrated that, after a 2-year follow-up, posterior surgery was noninferior to anterior surgery with regard to the success rate and arm pain reduction in patients with cervical radiculopathy. Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Effects of hydromorphone-based patient-controlled intravenous analgesia on postoperative hypoxaemia: a randomised controlled non-inferiority clinical trial

ObjectiveThis study aimed to compare the effects of patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) with and without low-basal infusion on postoperative hypoxaemia.DesignA randomised parallel-group non-inferiority trial.SettingThe trial was conducted at a grade-A...

Safety and effectiveness of using Disposable Ultrasonic shears to coagulate 5–7 mm blood vessels: protocol for a prospective, multicenter, randomized, parallel controlled, non-inferiority clinical trial

BackgroundThe ultrasonic scalpel is widely used during surgery. It is safe and effective to close the pulmonary artery branch vessels of 7 mm or below with an ultrasonic energy device as reported. However, there have been no multicenter randomized clinical trial to assess the safety and effectiveness of using ultrasonic scalpel to coagulate 5–7 mm blood vessels in thoracic surgery.MethodsThis is a prospective, multicenter, randomized, parallel controlled, non-inferiority clinical trial. A total of 144 eligible patients planning to undergo lung or esophageal surgery will be randomly allocated to the experimental group and the control group. The investigational product (Disposable Ultrasonic Shears manufactured by Reach Surgical, Inc.) and the control product (Harmonic Ace + 7, 5 mm Diameter Shears with Advanced Hemostasis) will be used in each group. The primary endpoint is the success rate of coagulating target blood vessels during surgery. Secondary endpoints include postoperative rebleeding, intraoperative bleeding volume, drainage volume, surgical duration, etc. Postoperative follow-up before and after discharge will be performed.DiscussionThis clinical trial aims to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of using the investigational product (Disposable Ultrasonic Shears manufactured by Reach Surgical, Inc.) and that of the control product (Harmonic Ace + 7, 5 mm Diameter Shears with Advanced Hemostasis) to coagulate 5–7 mm blood vessels in thoracic surgery.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT06002737. The trial was prospectively registered on 16 August 2023, https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06002737.

Operative versus Nonoperative Treatment of Proximal Hamstring Avulsions

BackgroundOperative treatment is widely used for acute proximal hamstring avulsions, but its effectiveness compared with that of nonoperative treatment has not been shown in randomized trials.MethodsIn this noninferiority trial at 10 centers in Sweden and Norway, we enrolled patients 30 to 70 years of age with a proximal hamstring avulsion in a randomized trial and a parallel observational cohort. Treatments were operative reinsertion of the tendons or nonoperative management. The primary end point was the Perth Hamstring Assessment Tool (PHAT) at 2 years of follow-up. Secondary outcomes included scores on the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS).ResultsA total of 119 patients were enrolled in the randomized trial and 97 patients in the observational cohort. In the per-protocol analysis of the randomized trial, the mean (±standard deviation) PHAT scores were 79.9±19.5 and 78.5±19.4 in the operative and nonoperative groups, respectively (PHAT scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating higher function). The prespecified noninferiority limit of 10 points was not crossed (mean difference, −1.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], −8.6 to 6.2; P=0.009 for noninferiority). Analyses of secondary outcomes, including a mean difference in the LEFS score of −1.6 (95% CI, −5.2 to 2.0), aligned with the primary outcome. The observed numbers of adverse events in the randomized trial were nine in the operative group versus three in the nonoperative group (odds ratio, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.1 to 1.2). In the analysis of the observational cohort, the mean PHAT score difference between the nonoperative and operative treatment groups was −2.6 (95% CI, −9.9 to 4.6).ConclusionsIn patients 30 to 70 years of age with proximal hamstring avulsions, nonoperative treatment was noninferior to operative treatment. (Funded by Afa Försäkring and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03311997.)

High flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy versus non-invasive ventilation for acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with acute-moderate hypercapnic respiratory failure: a randomized controlled non-inferiority trial

BackgroundAlthough cumulative studies have demonstrated a beneficial effect of high-flow nasal cannula oxygen (HFNC) in acute hypercapnic respiratory failure, randomized trials to compare HFNC with non-invasive ventilation (NIV) as initial treatment in acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) patients with acute-moderate hypercapnic respiratory failure are limited. The aim of this randomized, open label, non-inferiority trial was to compare treatment failure rates between HFNC and NIV in such patients.MethodsPatients diagnosed with AECOPD with a baseline arterial blood gas pH between 7.25 and 7.35 and PaCO2 ≥ 50 mmHg admitted to two intensive care units (ICUs) at a large tertiary academic teaching hospital between March 2018 and December 2022 were randomly assigned to HFNC or NIV. The primary endpoint was the rate of treatment failure, defined as endotracheal intubation or a switch to the other study treatment modality. Secondary endpoints were rates of intubation or treatment change, blood gas values, vital signs at one, 12, and 48 h, 28-day mortality, as well as ICU and hospital lengths of stay.Results225 total patients (113 in the HFNC group and 112 in the NIV group) were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. The failure rate of the HFNC group was 25.7%, while the NIV group was 14.3%. The failure rate risk difference between the two groups was 11.38% (95% CI 0.25–21.20, P = 0.033), which was higher than the non-inferiority cut-off of 9%. In the per-protocol analysis, treatment failure occurred in 28 of 110 patients (25.5%) in the HFNC group and 15 of 109 patients (13.8%) in the NIV group (risk difference, 11.69%; 95% CI 0.48–22.60). The intubation rate in the HFNC group was higher than in the NIV group (14.2% vs 5.4%, P = 0.026). The treatment switch rate, ICU and hospital length of stay or 28-day mortality in the HFNC group were not statistically different from the NIV group (all P > 0.05).ConclusionHFNC was not shown to be non-inferior to NIV and resulted in a higher incidence of treatment failure than NIV when used as the initial respiratory support for AECOPD patients with acute-moderate hypercapnic respiratory failure.Trial registration: chictr.org (ChiCTR1800014553). Registered 21 January 2018, http://www.chictr.org.cn

Switch to fixed-dose ainuovirine, lamivudine, and tenofovir DF versus elvitegravir, cobicistat, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide in virologically suppressed people living with HIV-1: the 48-week results of the SPRINT trial, a multi-centre, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, phase 3, non-inferiority trial

We compared the efficacy and safety profiles of ainuovirine (ANV), a new-generation non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI), with boosted elvitegravir (EVG), both coformulated with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs), in people living with HIV-1 (PLWH) who had achieved virological suppression on previous NNRTI-based antiretroviral (ARV) regimen. This study was a multi-centre, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, non-inferiority trial recruiting PLWH from 10 clinical centres across China. Main inclusion criteria included age of 18-65 years (inclusive), and stably staying on an ARV regimen combining an NNRTI with a two-drug NRTI backbone for at least 12 months. Eligible participants must have maintained plasma HIV-1 ribonucleic acid (RNA) titre below 50 copies per mL confirmed on two successive tests at an interval of at least one month prior to randomisation. Participants were randomly assigned to receive ANV 150mg plus lamivudine (3TC) 300mg, and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) 300mg (ANV/3TC/TDF), or cobicistat (Cobi) 150mg boosted EVG plus emtricitabine (FTC) 200mg, and tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) 10mg. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of participants with HIV-1 RNA titre at 50 copies per mL or above at week 48 using the US Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm, with a non-inferiority margin of 4 percentage points at a two-side 95% confidence level. This trial is active, but not recruiting, and is registered with Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR), number ChiCTR2100051605. Between October 2021 and February 2022, 923 patients were screened for eligibility, among whom 762 participants were randomized and had received at least one dose of ANV/3TC/TDF (n=381) or EVG/Cobi/FTC/TAF (n=381). At week 48, 7 (1.8%) participants on ANV/3TC/TDF and 6 (1.6%) participants on EVG/Cobi/FTC/TAF had plasma HIV-1 RNA titre at 50 copies per mL or above, including missing virological data within the time window (the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel method, estimated treatment difference [ETD], 0.3%, 95% CI-1.6 to 2.1), establishing the non-inferiority of ANV/3TC/TDF to EVG/Cobi/FTC/TAF. The proportions of participants experiencing at least one treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were comparable between the two arms (97.6% versus 97.6%). A small proportion of participants discontinued study drug due to AEs (0.3% versus 0.3%). Serious AEs occurred in 11 (2.9%) participants on ANV/3TC/TDF and 9 (2.4%) participants on EVG/Cobi/FTC/TAF, respectively, none of which was considered related to study drug at the jurisdiction of the investigator. At week 48, participants on ANV/3TC/TDF showed a significantly less weight gain from baseline compared to those on EVG/Cobi/FTC/TAF (least square mean, 1.16 versus 2.05kg, ETD-0.90kg, 95% CI,-1.43 to-0.37). The changes in serum lipids from baseline also favoured ANV/3TC/TDF over EVG/Cobi/FTC/TAF. In virologically suppressed PLWH on previous NNRTI-based ARV regimen, switch to ANV/3TC/TDF resulted in less weight gain, and improved lipid metabolism while maintaining virological suppression non-inferior to that to EVG/Cobi/FTC/TAF. Jiangsu Aidea Pharmaceutical & the National "Thirteenth Five-year Period" Major Innovative Drugs Research and Development Key Project of the People's Republic of China Ministry of Science and Technology.

Outpatient elective induction of labour at 39 weeks’ gestation (HOME INDUCTION): an open-label, randomised, controlled, phase III, non-inferiority trial

The increased demand for induction of labour (IOL) at 39 weeks' gestation in normal-risk nulliparous patients creates significant logistical challenges for busy maternity units. A potential innovation is commencing induction by means of outpatient cervical ripening, using either a vaginal prostaglandin preparation (Propess) or an osmotic cervical dilator (Dilapan-S). A Phase III, open label, single centre non-inferiority trial (EudraCT number 2019-004697-25) randomised healthy nulliparous women who chose elective IOL at 39 weeks to one of three methods of initial cervical ripening, specifically 12h of Dilapan-S(D12), 24h of Dilapan-S(D24), or 24h of Propess(P24) between November 2020 and July 2023. After initial administration of the IOL agent in the hospital, participants returned home for 12 or 24h, before readmission to complete delivery. The primary outcome was vaginal delivery achieved at any time, and this was compared in a non-inferiority analysis of Dilapan-S compared to Propess, within a 10% non-inferiority margin. Secondary outcomes included pairwise comparisons for each induction agent, and a range of logistical factors, such as time to delivery, the need for an additional cervical ripening agent, and length of hospital stay. Of the 327 women randomised at 38 weeks, 271 (83%) completed the induction intervention. The D24 and P24 groups showed similarly high rates of vaginal delivery, 75% and 76% respectively. D12 had a lower vaginal delivery rate of 64% and consequently the overall comparison of Dilapan-S to Propess did not demonstrate non-inferiority (difference=-6%, 95% CI=-17%, 5%) because the lower 95% CI exceeded the-10% threshold of non-inferiority. The majority of participants across all groups were delivered by any means within 72h of starting the induction process, inclusive of time spent at home (89% of the D24 group, 98% of the D12 group, 95% of the P24 group). There were no differences in rates of adverse events between groups. There were similarly high vaginal delivery rates for D24 and P24, with at least 75% of patients successfully delivering vaginally following outpatient cervical ripening, with no significant adverse maternal or neonatal outcomes. The Rotunda Foundation, Medicem Technology s.r.o.

Three-Year Outcomes of 6-Month Paliperidone Palmitate in Adults With Schizophrenia

Long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics have the potential to improve adherence and symptom control in patients with schizophrenia, promoting long-term recovery. Paliperidone palmitate (PP) once every 6 months is the first and currently only LAI antipsychotic with an extended dosing interval of 6 months. To assess long-term outcomes of PP received once every 6 months in adults with schizophrenia. In a 2-year open-label extension (OLE) study of a 1-year randomized clinical trial (RCT), eligible adults with schizophrenia could choose to continue PP every 6 months if they had not experienced relapse after receiving PP once every 3 or 6 months in the 1-year, international, multicenter, double-blind, randomized noninferiority trial. The present analysis focused on patients receiving PP every 6 months in the double-blind trial through the OLE study (November 20, 2017, to May 3, 2022). Patients received a dorsogluteal injection of PP on day 1 and once every 6 months up to month 30. End points included assessment of relapse and change from the double-blind trial baseline to the OLE end point in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total and subscale, Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) Scale, and Personal Social Performance (PSP) Scale scores. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), injection site evaluations, and laboratory tests were also assessed. Among 121 patients (83 [68.6%] male), mean (SD) age at baseline was 38.6 (11.24) years and mean (SD) duration of illness was 11.0 (9.45) years. At screening of the double-blind study, 101 patients (83.5%) were taking an oral antipsychotic and 20 (16.5%) were taking an LAI antipsychotic. Altogether, 5 of 121 patients (4.1%) experienced relapse during the 3-year follow-up; reasons for relapse were psychiatric hospitalization (2 [1.7%]), suicidal or homicidal ideation (2 [1.7%]), and deliberate self-injury (1 [0.8%]). Patients treated with PP every 6 months were clinically and functionally stable, and outcomes were well maintained, evidenced by stable scores on the PANSS (mean [SD] change, -2.6 [9.96] points), CGI-S (mean [SD] change, -0.2 [0.57] points), and PSP (mean [SD] change, 3.1 [9.14] points) scales over the 3-year period. In total, 101 patients (83.5%) completed the 2-year OLE. At least 1 TEAE was reported in 97 of 121 patients (80.2%) overall; no new safety or tolerability concerns were identified. In a 2-year OLE study of a 1-year RCT, results supported favorable long-term outcomes of PP once every 6 months for up to 3 years in adults with schizophrenia.