Primary Efficacy Measure Research Articles

Efficacy of erzhu jiedu recipe on hepatitis B cirrhosis with hyperalphafetoproteinemia: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial.

Hepatitis B cirrhosis with hyperalphafetoproteinemia is the intermediate stage of liver cirrhosis progressing to hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), there is no effective way to treat precancerous lesions of liver in modern medicine. In recent decades, clinical and experimental evidence shows that Chinese medicine (CM) has a certain beneficial effect on Hepatitis B Cirrhosis. Therefore, this trial aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a CM erzhu jiedu recipe (EZJDR) for the treatment of Hepatitis B Cirrhosis with Hyperalphafetoproteinemia. We designed a randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. A total of 72 patients of Hepatitis B Cirrhosis with hyperalphafetoproteinemia were randomized in 2 parallel groups. Patients in the control group received placebo granules similar to the EZJDR. In the EZJDR group, patients received EZJDR twice a day, after meals, for 48 weeks. The primary efficacy measures were changes in serum alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) and alpha-fetoprotein alloplasm (AFP-L3); The secondary indicators of efficacy are changes in liver function indicators, HBV-DNA level; Liver stiffness measurement (LSM); Hepatic portal vein diameter; T lymphocyte subgroup indexes during treatment. All data will be recorded in case report forms and analyzed by Statistical Analysis System software. Adverse events will also be evaluated. The results showed that EZJDR can significantly inhibit the levels of AFP and AFP-L3 in patients with hepatitis B cirrhosis and hyperalphafetoproteinemia and have good security. The study protocol was approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of Shuguang Hospital, affiliated with University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai (NO.2018-579-08-01). This trial was registered on Chinese Clinical Trial Center (NO.ChiCTR1800017165).

An open-label randomized multi-Centre study to evaluate anterior controllable Antedisplacement and fusion versus posterior Laminoplasty in patients with cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament: study design and analysis plan (STAR)

BackgroundIn treating patients with cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (COPLL), a novel surgery technique - anterior controllable antedisplacement and fusion (ACAF) suggested promising clinical benefits in recent exploratory studies.MethodsThis is a multicentre, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, active controlled trial that will compare the clinical benefits of ACAF versus conventional posterior laminoplasty (LAMP) in severe COPLL patients. A total of 164 patients will be enrolled and randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either ACAF or LAMP group. The primary efficacy measure is cervical- Japanese Orthopaedic Association (C-JOA) recovery rate at 12 months post operation, which is to be derived by Hirabayashi’s method from JOA data (range, 0 [worst] to 17 [normal condition]). Other important secondary efficacy endpoints include visual analogue scale (VAS) pain score (range, 0 [no pain] to 10 [most severe]), 10-item neck disability index (NDI, a total range of 0 to 50 points, the highest index the worst) and 6-level Nurick disability grade (range, 0 [mild] to 5 [severe]). Safety endpoints including adverse events, perioperative complications, and adverse events of special interest will also be assessed in this study. Full analysis set for baseline and efficacy data analyses according to the intention-to-treat principle will be established as the primary analysis population. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) will be used to analyze the C-JOA recovery rate, with random stratification factors (if appropriate) and the treatment group as fixed factors, and the baseline level of C-JOA score as covariate.DiscussionThis study is designed to demonstrate the clinical benefits of ACAF as compared to conventional LAMP in COPLL patients. It will provide clinical evidence that the novel surgery technique – ACAF might be more favorable in treating patients with severe cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament. (Words: 290).Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04968028.

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of AR19, a Manipulation-Resistant Formulation of Amphetamine Sulfate, in Adults With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder.

Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of AR19 in the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) diagnosed by DSM-5 criteria in adults from 18 through 55 years of age. AR19 is a pellets-in-capsule, immediate-release amphetamine sulfate investigational formulation with physical and chemical barriers designed to resist manipulation to deter snorting, smoking, and intravenous injection.Methods: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, fixed-dose, forced titration, multicenter trial investigated the safety and efficacy of AR19 from September 2018 to April 2019. Study participants were randomized and titrated to 20 mg or 40 mg AR19 daily or placebo. Study medication was dosed once in the morning and again 4 to 6 hours later for a period of 5 weeks. The primary efficacy measure was the total score on the Adult ADHD Investigator Symptom Rating Scale (AISRS).Results: Participants (N = 320) were randomized and received at least 1 dose of study medication. Demographics and baseline characteristics were similar across treatment groups. The least squares mean treatment differences versus placebo (97.5% CI) were -7.2 (-11.3 to -3.1) for the AR19 20-mg group and -7.3 (-11.4 to -3.2) for the AR19 40-mg group (each P < .001). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events occurring in participants in the AR19 treatment groups were insomnia, dry mouth, decreased appetite, palpitations, headache, and tachycardia and are consistent with the known safety profile of amphetamine sulfate.Conclusions: AR19 demonstrated efficacy on all endpoints and was generally well tolerated, supporting the efficacy and safety of AR19 20 mg and 40 mg in adults with ADHD.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03659929.

Withania somnifera as a safer option to hydroxychloroquine in the chemoprophylaxis of COVID-19: Results of interim analysis

ObjectivesTo study the efficacy and safety of Withania somnifera (WS, Ashwagandha) in the prophylaxis against COVID-19 in high risk health care workers (HCW) in comparison to hydroxychloroquine (HCQ). To evaluate the general physical and mental health benefits of Ashwagandha. MethodsA 16 week randomized prospective, open-label, parallel efficacy, two arm, multi-centre study. The primary efficacy measure was ‘failure of prophylaxis’ as confirmed COVID-19 by quantitative Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) at any time during the study period. This study on 400 participants from three centres was designed to establish non-inferiority for WS to HCQ for prophylaxis against COVID-19 at 80 % power and significance p < 0.025, one-sided. The interim analysis was carried out on 160 participants after completion of 8 weeks. ResultsParticipants in both the arms were well-matched at the baseline characteristics. Forty participants in the HCQ group and 26 participants in the WS group reported mild AE. The symptoms of confirmed COVID-19 were found to be 3.7 % (95 % CI 1.3–10.5 %) in the HCQ and 1.3 % (95 % CI 0.02–6.7 %) in the WS arm amongst the first 160 participants completing 8 weeks. ConclusionOur intent was to explore a safer option to HCQ. We report that WS was not found inferior to HCQ and its efficacy was within the 15 % non-inferiority margin set a priori. WS as an immunomodulator has other clinical benefits including reducing mental stress. The final report of this study is expected by end of August 2021.

P–299 Efficacy and safety of linzagolix for the treatment of severe adenomyosis: Initial results from a pilot study

Abstract Study question Is a once daily regimen of the GnRH antagonist, linzagolix, high-dose (200mg) for 12 weeks then low-dose (100mg) for 12 weeks, effective in severe adenomyosis? Summary answer After 12 weeks, there was marked shrinkage of uterine volume, regression of adenomyotic lesions and symptom improvement (pain, anemia), 24 weeks data is pending. What is known already Suppression of estradiol using GnRH antagonists has been shown to be an effective treatment for endometriosis and uterine fibroids. Linzagolix is an investigational, oral GnRH receptor antagonist, which dose-dependently reduces E2 levels, providing full suppression (serum E2 &amp;lt; 20 pg/mL) and partial suppression with once daily oral dosing of 200 mg and 100 mg, respectively. We hypothesized that a regimen of full suppression for 12 weeks followed by partial suppression maintenance therapy for 12 weeks could be effective for the treatment of severe adenomyosis. Study design, size, duration This was a single-center, open-label exploratory study in women with symptomatic adenomyosis confirmed by Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) (EudraCT number: 2017–004–042–14). Patients were recruited from a single private clinic and infertility research unit between March 2019 to June 2020. Participants/materials, setting, methods Eligible patients were premenopausal women 18 to 48 years old with symptomatic uterine adenomyosis confirmed by MRI, moderate-to-severe pain and abnormal uterine bleeding. The primary measure of efficacy was the reduction in uterine volume assessed by MRI. Other endpoints included adenomyosis lesion volume, pelvic pain, haemoglobin, uterine bleeding and quality of life (EHP–30 domains: pain, control and powerlessness, emotional well-being, social support and self-image). Main results and the role of chance Eight (3 black and 5 white) enrolled subjects had mean±SD age 42±3 years and weight 75±19 kg. At baseline (day 2 of the cycle) all patients presented with pelvic pain, severe dysmenorrhea and heavy menstrual bleeding. In all cases, MRI showed an enlarged uterus (mean±SD volume 343±253 cm3) with severe adenomyosis characterized by heterogenous myometrium with multiple myometrial cysts. The mean±SD junctional zone was 29.0±14.2 mm. Median serum estradiol was suppressed to 12 pg/mL by 4 weeks and this was maintained up to 12 weeks. After 12 weeks, mean±SD uterine volume was 162±117 cm3, a 57±16% reduction from baseline, with marked regression of adenomyotic lesions and the junctional zone was 21.0±13.4 mm. Mean±SD overall pelvic pain score (0–10 NRS) was reduced from 8.4±1.1 at baseline to 2.4±3.4 (p = 0.0035) and there were also improvements in dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, non-menstrual pelvic pain and dyschezia scores. No subjects reported uterine bleeding between Weeks 4 to 12. Mean±SD haemoglobin was 12.1±2.0 at baseline and 12.8±1.1 at 12 weeks. Anemia at baseline (≤10g/dL) was resolved by 12 weeks. Substantial improvements were observed on each of the EHP–30 domains. The most common side effect was the expected hypoestrogenic side effects of hot flushes, which were reported by 6/8 subjects. Limitations, reasons for caution This was a single-centre, open-label pilot study in 8 patients with symptomatic adenomyosis. We report the results after the first 12 weeks treatment of a high full suppression dose of linzagolix. Results after 24 weeks will further inform on the potential for a low partial suppression dose to maintain efficacy. Wider implications of the findings: The initial results of this open-label pilot study in women with severe adenomyosis indicate that a high full suppression dose of linzagolix 200 mg is effective in reducing uterine and adenomyosis lesion size, reducing abnormal uterine bleeding and pelvic pain and improving quality of life. Trial registration number EudraCT number: 2017–004–042–14

Overview of systematic reviews on Shenmai Injection in prevention and treatment of diseases

To summarize and evaluate the efficacy and safety of Shenmai Injection in the treatment of viral myocarditis, shock, pulmonary heart disease, coronary heart disease, neutropenia and tumor chemotherapy, so as to provide supportive evidences for clinical rational use of Shenmai Injection. By searching literatures about studies on the systematic reviews on Shenmai Injection in treatment of viral myocarditis, shock, pulmonary heart disease, coronary heart disease, neutropenia and tumor chemotherapy from the main Chinese and English databases. Primary efficacy and safety outcome measures were selected for comparative analysis and summary, and the appraisal tool of AMSTAR 2 was used to evaluate the included studies.A total of 36 systematic reviews(published from 2005 to 2020) were included, involving viral myocarditis, shock, pulmonary heart disease, malignant tumor and coronary heart disease. The number of cases included in each type of the above diseases was 3 840, 2 484, 12 702, 28 036 and 27 082, respectively. The comparison results showed that, Shenmai Injection combined with conventional/western medicine treatment groups had better efficacy than conventional/western medicine groups alone in the prevention and treatment of the above five diseases. The main adverse reactions of Shenmai Injection reported in the included studies were facial flushing, rash, palpitation, etc., but the incidence was low and the general symptoms were mild, so no special treatment was needed. Therefore, the application of Shenmai Injection on the basis of conventional treatment or western medicine treatment had better prevention and treatment efficacy of the diseases. It was suggested that more multi-center and larger sample-size randomized controlled trials should be carried out in the future, and the relevant reporting standards should be strictly followed in systematic reviews, so as to improve the scientificity and transparency of the study.

Efficacy of Lasers for the Management of Dermatophyte Toenail Onychomycosis.

Onychomycosis is a chronic fungal nail infection caused predominantly by dermatophytes, and less commonly by nondermatophyte molds and Candida species. Onychomycosis treatment includes oral and topical antifungals, the efficacy of which is evaluated through randomized, double-blind, controlled trials for US Food and Drug Administration approval. The primary efficacy measure is complete cure (complete mycologic and clinical cure). The secondary measures are clinical cure (usually ≤10% involvement of target nail) and mycologic cure (negative microscopy and culture). Some lasers are US Food and Drug Administration approved for the mild temporary increase in clear nail; however, some practitioners attempt to use lasers to treat and cure onychomycosis. A systematic review of the literature was performed in July of 2020 to evaluate the efficacy rates demonstrated by randomized controlled trials of laser monotherapy for dermatophyte onychomycosis of the great toenail. Randomized controlled trials assessing the efficacy of laser monotherapy for dermatophyte toenail onychomycosis are limited. Many studies measured cure rates by means of nails instead of patients, and performed only microscopy or culture, not both. Only one included study reported mycologic cure rate in patients as negative light microscopy and culture (0%). The combined clinical cure rates in short- and long-pulsed laser studies were 13.0%-16.7% and 25.9%, respectively. There was no study that reported the complete cure rate; however, one did report treatment success (mycologic cure [negative microscopy and culture] and ≤10% clinical involvement) in nails as 16.7%. The effectiveness of lasers as a therapeutic intervention for dermatophyte toenail onychomycosis is limited based on complete, mycologic, and clinical cure rates. However, it may be possible to use different treatment parameters or lasers with a different wavelength to increase the efficacy. Lasers could be a potential management option for older patients and onychomycosis patients with coexisting conditions such as diabetes, liver, and/or kidney diseases for whom systemic antifungal agents are contraindicated or have failed.

Study protocol for a randomised placebo-controlled trial of pramipexole in addition to mood stabilisers for patients with treatment resistant bipolar depression (the PAX-BD study)

BackgroundTreatment Resistant Bipolar Depression (TRBD) is a major contributor to the burden of disease associated with Bipolar Disorder (BD). Treatment options for people experiencing bipolar depression are limited to three interventions listed by National Institute for Health and Care: lamotrigine, quetiapine and olanzapine, of which the latter two are often not well tolerated. The majority of depressed people with BD are therefore prescribed antidepressants despite limited efficacy. This demonstrates an unmet need for additional interventions. Pramipexole has been shown to improve mood symptoms in animal models of depression, in people with Parkinson’s Disease and two proof of principle trials of pramipexole for people with BD who are currently depressed.MethodsThe PAX-BD study, funded by the United Kingdom (UK) National Institute for Health Research, aims to extend previous findings by assessing the efficacy, safety and health economic impact of pramipexole in addition to mood stabilisers for patients with TRBD. A randomised, double-blind, placebo controlled design is conducted in a naturalistic UK National Health Service setting. An internal pilot study to examine feasibility and acceptability of the study design is included. Participants with TRBD are screened from National Health Service secondary care services in up to 40 mental health trusts in the UK, with the aim of recruiting approximately 414 participants into a pre-randomisation phase to achieve a target of 290 randomised participants. Primary safety and efficacy measures are at 12 weeks following randomisation, with follow up of participants to 52 weeks. The primary outcome is depressive symptoms as measured by Quick Inventory for Depressive Symptomatology – Self Report. Secondary outcomes include changes in anxiety, manic symptoms, tolerability, acceptability, quality of life and cost-effectiveness. Outcome measures are collected remotely using self-report tools implemented online, and observer-rated assessments conducted via telephone. ANCOVA will be used to examine the difference in rating scale scores between treatment arms, and dependent on compliance in completion of weekly self-report measures. A mixed effects linear regression model may also be used to account for repeated measures.Trial registrationISRCTN72151939. Registered on 28 August 2019, http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN72151939Protocol Version: 04-FEB-2021, Version 9.0.

100-OR: ADA Presidents’ Select Abstract: Efficacy and Safety of Once-Weekly Tirzepatide, a Dual GIP/GLP-1 Receptor Agonist vs. Placebo as Monotherapy in People with Type 2 Diabetes (SURPASS-1)

Tirzepatide (TZP) is a novel dual GIP/GLP-1 receptor agonist in development for type 2 diabetes (T2D). Efficacy and safety of TZP vs. placebo (PBO) was assessed in people with T2D inadequately controlled with diet and exercise alone. In this double-blind, PBO-controlled, 40-wk Phase 3 study, people with T2D (N=478; mean baseline [BL] HbA1c 7.94%; age 54.1 y; T2D duration 4.7 y; BMI 31.9 kg/m2) were randomized (1:1:1:1) to TZP (5, 10, 15 mg) or PBO. Primary efficacy measure was mean change in HbA1c from BL at 40 wk. Secondary measures were mean change in fasting serum glucose (FSG) and body weight (BW) and proportion achieving HbA1c and BW goals. TZP 5, 10 and 15 mg were superior to PBO in mean change in HbA1c at 40 wk (LSM treatment difference [95% CI]: -1.91% [-2.18, -1.63], -1.93% [-2.21, -1.65], -2.11% [-2.39, -1.83]; p In conclusion, TZP as T2D monotherapy demonstrated robust clinically meaningful reductions in HbA1c and BW without hypoglycemia (BG Disclosure J. Rosenstock: Board Member; Self; Applied Therapeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Eli Lilly and Company, Intarcia Therapeutics, Inc., Novo Nordisk, Oramed Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Sanofi, Consultant; Self; Applied Therapeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Eli Lilly and Company, Intarcia Therapeutics, Inc., Novo Nordisk, Oramed Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Sanofi, Research Support; Self; Applied Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Eli Lilly and Company, Genentech, Inc., Intarcia Therapeutics, Inc., Lexicon Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, Novo Nordisk, Oramed Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Pfizer Inc., REMD Biotherapeutics, Sanofi. C. H. Wysham: Other Relationship; Self; Abbott Laboratories, American Diabetes Association, Endocrine Society, Medscape Education, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi-Aventis, Research Support; Self; Eli Lilly and Company, Mylan N. V., Mylan N. V., Speaker’s Bureau; Self; AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. J. P. Frias: Consultant; Self; 89bio, Inc., Altimmune, Axcella Health Inc., Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Eli Lilly and Company, Gilead Sciences, Inc., Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Merck & Co., Inc., Novo Nordisk, Pfizer Inc., Sanofi, Research Support; Self; AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, CymaBay Therapeutics, Eli Lilly and Company, Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Madrigal Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Merck & Co., Inc., Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer Inc., Sanofi, Speaker’s Bureau; Self; Merck & Co., Inc., Sanofi. S. Kaneko: Advisory Panel; Self; Novo Nordisk Pharma Ltd., Consultant; Self; Novo Nordisk Pharma Ltd., Research Support; Self; Eli Lilly Japan K. K., Novo Nordisk Pharma Ltd., Speaker’s Bureau; Self; AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly Japan K. K., Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Corporation, Nippon Boehringer Ingelheim Co. Ltd., Novo Nordisk Pharma Ltd., Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma Co., Ltd. C. Lee: Employee; Self; Eli Lilly and Company, Stock/Shareholder; Self; Eli Lilly and Company. L. Fernandez lando: Employee; Self; Eli Lilly and Company, Stock/Shareholder; Self; Eli Lilly and Company. H. Mao: Employee; Self; Eli Lilly and Company. X. Cui: Employee; Self; Eli Lilly and Company. V. Thieu: None. Funding Eli Lilly and Company

80-LB: Tirzepatide, a Dual GIP/GLP-1 Receptor Agonist, Is Effective and Safe When Added to Basal Insulin for Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes (SURPASS-5)

Tirzepatide (TZP) is a novel dual GIP/GLP-1 receptor agonist in development for type 2 diabetes (T2D). Efficacy and safety of TZP vs. placebo (PBO) was assessed in people with T2D as an add-on to titrated insulin glargine with or without metformin. In this double-blind, PBO-controlled, 40-wk Phase 3 study, 475 people with T2D (mean baseline [BL] age 60.6 y; T2D duration 13.3 y; HbA1c 8.31%; BMI 33.4 kg/m2) were randomized (1:1:1:1) to TZP (5 mg, 10 mg, 15 mg) or PBO, as an add-on to their existing therapy. Primary efficacy measure was mean change in HbA1c from BL at 40 wk. Secondary measures included change in fasting serum glucose (FSG) and body weight (BW), and proportion of people achieving HbA1c and BW loss goals. All 3 TZP doses were superior to PBO in change from BL in HbA1c, FSG, BW, and percentage patients achieving all HbA1c and BW loss targets at 40 wk (Table). TZP was generally well tolerated and the most common AEs were gastrointestinal (diarrhea, nausea, and vomiting) and mild to moderate in severity. Level 2 hypoglycemia incidence ( Disclosure D. Dahl: Research Support; Self; Afimmune Limited, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly and Company, Novartis AG, Novo Nordisk. Y. Onishi: Speaker’s Bureau; Self; Daiichi Sankyo Company, Limited, Novo Nordisk, Ono Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma Co., Ltd. P. Norwood: Other Relationship; Self; Eli Lilly and Company, Research Support; Self; Eli Lilly and Company. R. Huh: None. H. Patel: Employee; Self; Eli Lilly and Company, Stock/Shareholder; Self; Eli Lilly and Company. A. Rodriguez: Employee; Self; Eli Lilly and Company, Stock/Shareholder; Self; Eli Lilly and Company. Funding Eli Lilly and Company

The Efficacy of Computerized Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Depressive and Anxiety Symptoms in Patients With COVID-19: Randomized Controlled Trial.

BackgroundThe prevalence of depressive and anxiety symptoms in patients with COVID-19 is higher than usual. Previous studies have shown that there are drug-to-drug interactions between antiretroviral drugs and antidepressants. Therefore, an effective and safe treatment method was needed. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is the first-line psychological therapy in clinical treatment. Computerized CBT (cCBT) was proven to be an effective alternative to CBT and does not require face-to-face therapy between a therapist and the patient, which suited the COVID-19 pandemic response.ObjectiveThis study aims to evaluate the efficacy of the cCBT program we developed in improving depressive and anxiety symptoms among patients with COVID-19.MethodsWe customized a cCBT program focused on improving depressive and anxiety symptoms among patients with COVID-19, and then, we assessed its effectiveness. Screening was based on symptoms of depression or anxiety for patients who scored ≥7 on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD17) or the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAMA). A total of 252 patients with COVID-19 at five sites were randomized into two groups: cCBT + treatment as usual (TAU; n=126) and TAU without cCBT (n=126). The cCBT + TAU group received the cCBT intervention program for 1 week. The primary efficacy measures were the HAMD17 and HAMA scores. The secondary outcome measures were the Self-Rating Depression Scale (SDS), Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS), and Athens Insomnia Scale (AIS). Assessments were carried out pre- and postintervention. The patients’ symptoms of anxiety and depression in one of the centers were assessed again within 1 month after the postintervention assessment.ResultsThe cCBT + TAU group displayed a significantly decreased score on the HAMD17, HAMA, SDS, SAS, and AIS after the intervention compared to the TAU group (all P<.001). A mixed-effects repeated measures model revealed significant improvement in symptoms of depression (HAMD17 and SDS scores, both P<.001), anxiety (HAMA and SAS scores, both P<.001), and insomnia (AIS score, P=.002) during the postintervention and follow-up periods in the cCBT + TAU group. Additionally, the improvement of insomnia among females (P=.14) and those with middle school education (P=.48) in the cCBT + TAU group showed no significant differences when compared to the TAU group.ConclusionsThe findings of this study suggest that the cCBT program we developed was an effective nonpharmacological treatment for symptoms of anxiety, depression, and insomnia among patients with COVID-19. Further research is warranted to investigate the long-term effects of cCBT for symptoms of anxiety, depression, and insomnia in patients with COVID-19.Trial RegistrationChinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2000030084; http://www.chictr.org.cn/showprojen.aspx?proj=49952

A phase 3, randomized, controlled trial of Astodrimer 1% Gel for preventing recurrent bacterial vaginosis.

The objective of the study was to confirm the efficacy and safety of Astodrimer 1% Gel to prevent recurrence of bacterial vaginosis. 864 women with a diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis and a history of recurrent bacterial vaginosis were enrolled in North America and first received oral metronidazole (500 mg twice daily for 7 days). Women successfully treated with metronidazole were randomly assigned 1:1 to Astodrimer 1% Gel (N = 295) or placebo (N = 291) at a dose of 5 g vaginally every second day for 16 weeks, and followed for a further 12 weeks off-treatment. The primary endpoint was recurrence of bacterial vaginosis (presence of ≥3 Amsel criteria) at or by Week 16. Secondary endpoints included time to recurrence, and recurrence of subject-reported symptoms. Adverse events were monitored throughout the study. Astodrimer 1% Gel was superior to placebo for the primary and many secondary efficacy measures. At or by Week 16, bacterial vaginosis recurred in 44.2 % (130/294) of women receiving astodrimer and 54.3 % (158/291) receiving placebo (P = .015). Time to recurrence of bacterial vaginosis was significantly longer for women receiving astodrimer compared with placebo (Kaplan-Meier survival curves, P = .007). Recurrence of subject-reported symptoms at or by Week 16 was also significantly lower in the astodrimer arm compared with placebo (vaginal odor and/or discharge, 27.9 % [75/269] vs 40.6 % [108/266], P = .002). A significantly lower proportion of patients receiving astodrimer compared with placebo had recurrence of bacterial vaginosis at or by Week 16 by other secondary measures, including individual Amsel criteria (vaginal discharge and clue cells) and Nugent score 7-10. Recurrence of subject-reported vaginal odor and/or discharge was significantly lower in the astodrimer arm compared with placebo up to 8 weeks after cessation of therapy (36.1 % [97/269] vs 45.5 % [121/266], P = .027).Adverse events were infrequent, and rates were generally similar between placebo and astodrimer groups. Vulvovaginal candidiasis and urinary tract infection occurred more often in women receiving astodrimer. Astodrimer 1% Gel, administered every second day for 16 weeks, was effective and superior to placebo for prevention of recurrent bacterial vaginosis in women with a history of recurrent BV, and was well-tolerated.

N-acetylcysteine as an adjunctive treatment for bipolar depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Previous studies and meta-analyses suggested that N-acetylcysteine (NAC) was superior to placebo in improving depression in bipolar disorder. However, more recent data, including two larger trials, found that NAC was no more effective than placebo. We conducted a meta-analysis to appraise the possible efficacy of NAC in treating bipolar depression. A systematic review and meta-analysis of double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of NAC as a treatment augmentation strategy for bipolar depression was carried out in PubMed (1966-2020). We utilized random-effect analysis to evaluate improvement in depressive symptoms from baseline to endpoint as the primary efficacy measure. Six trials including 248 patients were included. Treatment augmentation with NAC showed a moderate effect size favoring NAC over placebo (d=0.45, 95% C.I.: 0.06-0.84). There was substantial heterogeneity (I2 =49%). Meta-regression analyses did not identify any moderator that might explain variation in heterogeneity, including baseline depressive symptom scores, mean NAC dose, or duration of study. Results from six clinical trials suggest that treatment augmentation with NAC for bipolar depression appears to be superior to placebo, with a moderate effect size, but a large confidence interval. Larger clinical trials, investigating possible moderating factors, such as NAC dose, treatment duration, baseline depression severity, or chronicity of illness, are warranted.

Pirfenidone Solution for Inhalation (AP01) for Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis (ATLAS Study): A Randomized, Open-Label, Dose-Response Trial

Background: Oral pirfenidone reduces lung function decline and mortality in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). Systemic exposure can have significant side effects including nausea, rash, photosensitivity, weight loss, and fatigue. Dosage reductions in response to side effects may be suboptimal in slowing the rate of disease progression. This trial (ATLAS) assessed the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of pirfenidone solution for inhalation (AP01) in patients with IPF. Methods: This phase 1b randomized, open-label, dose-response trial is being performed at 25 sites in six countries (ANZCTR: ACTRN12618001838202). Patients diagnosed with IPF within 5 years, forced vital capacity (FVC) 40–90% predicted, and intolerant, unwilling, or ineligible for oral pirfenidone or nintedanib were randomly assigned 1:1 to nebulized AP01 50 mg once daily (QD) or 100 mg twice daily (BID) for 48 weeks. The primary efficacy measure was absolute change in FVC % predicted. Findings: Participants were recruited between May 31, 2019, and April 30, 2020; of 141 IPF patients screened, 91 were enrolled (50 mg QD: n=46, 100 mg BID: n=45). Changes in FVC % predicted (95% CI) over 48 weeks, estimated as slopes, were −­5·3 (−8·0, −2·7) in the 50 mg QD and −0·5 (−3·3, 2·3) in the 100 mg BID groups (evaluable n=39 and 34, respectively); difference was 4·8 (1·0, 8·7); p=0·0152. The most common treatment-related adverse events (all mild to moderate) included cough (14, 15·4%), rash (11, 12·1%), nausea (8, 8·8%), throat irritation (5, 5·5%), dysgeusia and fatigue (4 each, 4·4%), and dizziness and dyspnoea (3 each, 3·3%). Interpretation: Mean FVC % predicted was stable in the 100 mg BID group, and FVC response was significantly better than in the 50 mg QD group. Nausea and rash side effects commonly associated with oral pirfenidone were less frequent with AP01. Further study of AP01 is warranted. Trial Registration: This phase 1b randomized, open-label, dose-response trial is being performed at 25 sites in six countries (ANZCTR: ACTRN12618001838202). Funding: Avalyn Pharma Declaration of Interest: MLS, DN, LF, KO, and ABM are all employees of the sponsor, Avalyn Pharma. Authors AGW, AB, MLWilsher, PH, MS, and WP report no conflicts of interest. NC received a grant from Boehringer Ingelheim and consulting fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Carrick, Carrick, Redex, UCB, and Novartis; speaker fees and travel sponsorship from Boehringer Ingelheim and Roche; and payment for participation on data safety monitoring/advisory board from Boehringer Ingelheim. IG reports consulting fees from Amplia, Ad Alta, and Accendatech; speaking fees from Boehringer Ingelheim; and payment for participation in a safety review committee from Accendatech. TJC reports receiving grants/contracts from Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, Biogen, Galapagos, and Avalyn Pharma; speaker’s honoraria from Boehringer Ingelheim and Roche; and payment for participation on data safety monitoring/advisory board from Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Promedior. EJ received honoraria for lectures from Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, AstraZeneca, MDS, Chiesi; sponsored travel to meetings from Boehringer Ingelheim and Roche; and payment for participation in advisory boards from Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, AstraZeneca, Novartis, MDS, Berlin-Chemie, and Chiesi. MWijsenbeek reports payments to her institution from Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, the Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development, the Dutch Lung Foundation, the Dutch Pulmonary Fibrosis Patient Association, the Thorax Foundation, ErasmusMC, and Sarcoidoisis.nl. Consulting fees were paid to her institution by Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, Galapagos, Bristol Myers Squibb, Galecto, and Respivant; honoraria were paid to her institution by Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, and Novartis. MWijsenbeek received sponsored travel from Boehringer Ingelheim and Roche, and her institution received payment for her participation in data safety monitoring/advisory board from Savara and Galapagos. CG received consulting fees from Avalyn Pharma. GR reports receiving support from Avalyn Pharma for consulting and for chairing the Data Safety Monitoring Board during the conduct of the study; personal and consulting fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Respivant, and Roche; grants from the NIH; and consulting fees from Bellerophon Therapeutics, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Fibrogen, Nitto, Promedior, Respivant, and Veracyte. Ethical Approval: The trial was approved by local ethics committees, and all patients provided written informed consent before trial entry.

Using Mixture of Normal Distributions to Detect Treatment Effects when the Frequentist Method Fails

Background: Results from a clinical trial can either support the efficacy and safety of a new compound or fail to provide such evidence. One reason for ‘non[1]positive’ result is due to the underlying assumption of normality and homogeneity of variances, which are quite often violated when analyzing data from clinical trials, despite randomization. A question of interest is can we obtain more informative results when using mixture of normal distributions or linear models (MLMs) in such cases. Introduction: MLM can be used when traditional methods fail. MLMs “search” within the variability in data to identify components or subgroups of individuals (also known as latent classes) who have common intercepts and common slopes of change in a variable/endpoint of interest but whose intercepts and slopes are different from other subsets of patients. Thus, MLMs can be used to identify subgroups of patients exhibiting differential response to treatment within each treatment arm. The purpose of our study was to examine the usefulness of using MLM in such circumstances. Methods: Data of 155 subjects taken from a Multicenter, randomized, double blind, placebo controlled trial that evaluated the efficacy of Cpn10, administered twice weekly subcutaneously to treat Rheumatoid Arthritis was taken to evaluate the usefulness of MLM. The primary efficacy measure ACR20 was analyzed using a 3-step process: first, MLM was used to estimate RA duration using a 3-component model. The second step took the results of the first step to inform the logistic model and its analyses. Model was fitted with an intercept, MLM components, treatment arm, RA duration (linear and quadratic), dose response (modeled as an interaction effect), age and baseline weight. LOCF was used to impute for missing data. Data was analyzed using MLM and SAS v 9.0. Results: The model was a good fit to the data with a likelihood ratio significant at p=0.026, and a significant increase in the -2log L. We also observed low p-values for those variables that were non normal. Overall and for the 75 mg dose, Cpn 10 was efficacious relative to placebo, p&lt;0.050. We also observed that dose response was significant at p&gt;&lt;0.15 Conclusion: The use of MLM adds value because it can be used to understand the disease experience or the value of treatment when traditional statistical methods cannot. Key words: Mixture of linear models, normality, entropy.

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Two-Way Crossover Clinical Trial of ORADUR-Methylphenidate for Treating Children and Adolescents with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

Objective: Methylphenidate (MPH) is efficacious in reducing symptoms of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), but there are no data about the efficacy and safety of its new formulation (ORADUR®-MPH extended release, ORADUR-MPH) in patients with ADHD, which is the study objective.Method: This was a Phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, two-way crossover clinical trial. One hundred children and adolescents with a clinical diagnosis of ADHD (72.7% male) received at least one dose of ORADUR-MPH or a placebo during the 2-week treatment period of each phase. The primary efficacy measure was the Swanson, Nolan, and Pelham-IV-teacher (SNAP-IV-T) form. Secondary efficacy measures included the SNAP-IV-parent form, the Clinical Global Impression: ADHD-Severity score, the Conner's Teacher's Rating Scale score, and the investigator's rating for 18 Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition ADHD symptoms. In addition, data related to vital signs, body weight, physical examination, laboratory testing, and adverse events (AEs) were also collected. All data were analyzed on an intent-to-treat basis.Results: Without adjusting for differences in demographics and baseline measures, both treatment groups showed significant reductions in ADHD and oppositional defiant disorder symptoms after a 2-week treatment with greater effect sizes (Cohen's d) in the ORADUR-MPH group (Cohen's d ranging from −0.41 to −1.64; placebo, Cohen's d ranging from −0.26 to −1.18), except for oppositional symptoms, regardless of the informants. For the primary efficacy measure, ORADUR-MPH was significantly superior to the placebo, as evidenced by lower values for and greater reductions in the SNAP-IV-T scores at the endpoint (Cohen's d = −0.16, p = 0.005) and from baseline to the endpoint (Cohen's d = −0.19, p = 0.006), respectively. There were no serious AEs during the clinical study period. The most frequently observed AE was decreased appetite (49.1%). Most physical and laboratory test variables remained within the normal range.Conclusions: Once-daily ORADUR-MPH is an effective, well-tolerable, and safe treatment for children and adolescents with ADHD. ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02450890.

Onset of effect and impact on health-related quality of life, exacerbation rate, lung function, and nasal polyposis symptoms for patients with severe eosinophilic asthma treated with benralizumab (ANDHI): a randomised, controlled, phase 3b trial

ANDHI was done to assess the efficacy of benralizumab, including onset of effect and impact on health-related quality of life (HRQOL), exacerbation rate, lung function, and nasal polyposis symptoms. This phase 3b, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled ANDHI study was completed in adults (aged 18-75 years) with severe eosinophilic asthma with at least 2 exacerbations in the previous year, despite high-dose inhaled corticosteroid plus additional controllers, screening blood eosinophil counts of at least 150 cells per μL, and an Asthma Control Questionnaire 6 (ACQ-6) score of 1·5 or more. Patients who met eligibility criteria were randomly assigned (2:1; stratified by previous exacerbation count [two, or three or more], maintenance oral corticosteroid use, and region), using an integrated web-based response system, to receive benralizumab at 30 mg every 8 weeks (first three doses given 4 weeks apart) or matched placebo for 24 weeks. Primary efficacy measure was annualised asthma exacerbation rate, with rate ratio (RR) calculated over the approximate 24-week follow-up. Secondary efficacy measures included change from baseline to end of treatment (week 24) in St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score (key secondary endpoint), FEV1, peak expiratory flow (PEF), ACQ-6, Predominant Symptom and Impairment Assessment (PSIA), Clinician Global Impression of Change (CGI-C), Patient Global Impression of Change (PGI-C), and Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22 (SNOT-22). All efficacy analyses, except for SNOT-22, were summarised and analysed using the full analysis set on an intention-to-treat population (all randomly assigned patients receiving investigational product, regardless of protocol adherence or continued participation in the study). SNOT-22 was summarised for the subgroup of patients with physician-diagnosed nasal polyposis with informed consent. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03170271. Between July 7, 2017, and Sept 25, 2019, 656 patients received benralizumab (n=427) or placebo (n=229). Baseline characteristics were consistent with severe eosinophilic asthma. Benralizumab significantly reduced exacerbation risk by 49% compared with placebo (RR estimate 0·51, 95% CI 0·39-0·65; p<0·0001) over the 24-week treatment period and provided clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvement from baseline to week 24 in SGRQ total score versus placebo (least squares mean change from baseline -8·11 (95% CI -11·41 to -4·82; p<0·0001), with similar differences at earlier timepoints. Benralizumab improved FEV1, PEF, ACQ-6, CGI-C, PGI-C, PSIA, and SNOT-22 at week 24 versus placebo, with differences observed early (within weeks 1 to 4). Adverse events were reported for 271 (63%) of 427 patients on benralizumab versus 143 (62%) of 229 patients on placebo. The most commonly reported adverse events for the 427 patients receiving benralizumab (frequency >5%) were nasopharyngitis (30 [7%]), headache (37 [9%]), sinusitis (28 [7%]), bronchitis (22 [5%]), and pyrexia (26 [6%]). Fewer serious adverse events were reported for benralizumab (23 [5%]) versus placebo (25 [11%]), and the only common serious adverse event (experienced by >1% of patients) was worsening of asthma, which was reported for nine (2%) patients in the benralizumab group and nine (4%) patients in the placebo group. Our results extend the efficacy profile of benralizumab for patients with severe eosinophilic asthma, showing early clinical benefits in patient-reported outcomes, HRQOL, lung function, and nasal polyposis symptoms. AstraZeneca.

Hemodynamic Effects of Ultrasound-Assisted, Catheter-Directed, Very Low-Dose, Short-Time Duration Thrombolysis in Acute Intermediate–High Risk Pulmonary Embolism (from the EKOS-PL Study)

Ultrasound-assisted, catheter-directed, low-dose thrombolysis (USAT) at an average alteplase dose of 20 mg infused over 12 to 24 hours reversed right ventricular disfunction and improved pulmonary hemodynamics in intermediate-high-risk pulmonary embolism patients. As bleeding risk increases with the thrombolytic dose, establishing a minimal effective USAT dosing regimen is of clinical importance. We aimed to investigate hemodynamic effects and safety of a very low-alteplase-dose USAT of 10 mg administered within 5 hours. We included 12 consecutive intermediate-high-risk pulmonary embolism patients with symptoms duration of <14 days and proximal thrombi location in pulmonary arteries. Pulmonary Embolism Response Team decision-based fixed, bilateral ultrasound-assisted alteplase infusions at the rate of 1mg/hour/catheter for 5 hours through EKOS system catheters were made. The primary efficacy measure was the change in invasive systolic and mean pulmonary arteries pressure, and in cardiac index from USAT start to termination. Safety measures were 180-day all-cause death or cardiopulmonary decompensation and bleeding complications. The systolic pulmonary arteries pressure and mean pulmonary arteries pressure decreased from 53 (45.5 to 59) to 37.5 (27.5 to 40.5) mm Hg (p = 0.02) and from 29.5 (27.5 to 32) to 21.5 (15.5 to 25) mm Hg (p = 0.02), respectively. The cardiac index increased from 1.6 (1.5 to 1.8) to 2.2 (1.9 to 2.4) l/min/m2, (p = 0.02). No deaths, decompensations, or need for therapy intensification occurred. There was 1 episode of access-site bleeding, which subsided after conservative management. No intracranial hemorrhages appeared. In conclusion, reduced dose and duration USAT improved pulmonary hemodynamics and cardiac function leading to cardiopulmonary stabilization in intermediate-high risk pulmonary embolism patients at a low periprocedural risk.

Effect of High-Dose Omega-3 Fatty Acids vs Corn Oil on Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Patients at High Cardiovascular Risk

It remains uncertain whether the omega-3 fatty acids eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) reduce cardiovascular risk. To determine the effects on cardiovascular outcomes of a carboxylic acid formulation of EPA and DHA (omega-3 CA) with documented favorable effects on lipid and inflammatory markers in patients with atherogenic dyslipidemia and high cardiovascular risk. A double-blind, randomized, multicenter trial (enrollment October 30, 2014, to June 14, 2017; study termination January 8, 2020; last patient visit May 14, 2020) comparing omega-3 CA with corn oil in statin-treated participants with high cardiovascular risk, hypertriglyceridemia, and low levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C). A total of 13 078 patients were randomized at 675 academic and community hospitals in 22 countries in North America, Europe, South America, Asia, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa. Participants were randomized to receive 4 g/d of omega-3 CA (n = 6539) or corn oil, which was intended to serve as an inert comparator (n = 6539), in addition to usual background therapies, including statins. The primary efficacy measure was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, coronary revascularization, or unstable angina requiring hospitalization. When 1384 patients had experienced a primary end point event (of a planned 1600 events), the trial was prematurely halted based on an interim analysis that indicated a low probability of clinical benefit of omega-3 CA vs the corn oil comparator. Among the 13 078 treated patients (mean [SD] age, 62.5 [9.0] years; 35% women; 70% with diabetes; median low-density lipoprotein [LDL] cholesterol level, 75.0 mg/dL; median triglycerides level, 240 mg/dL; median HDL-C level, 36 mg/dL; and median high-sensitivity C-reactive protein level, 2.1 mg/L), 12 633 (96.6%) completed the trial with ascertainment of primary end point status. The primary end point occurred in 785 patients (12.0%) treated with omega-3 CA vs 795 (12.2%) treated with corn oil (hazard ratio, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.90-1.09]; P = .84). A greater rate of gastrointestinal adverse events was observed in the omega-3 CA group (24.7%) compared with corn oil-treated patients (14.7%). Among statin-treated patients at high cardiovascular risk, the addition of omega-3 CA, compared with corn oil, to usual background therapies resulted in no significant difference in a composite outcome of major adverse cardiovascular events. These findings do not support use of this omega-3 fatty acid formulation to reduce major adverse cardiovascular events in high-risk patients. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02104817.

A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Mirtazapine for the Treatment of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in Veterans.

The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of mirtazapine, a tetracyclic antidepressant, as monotherapy for the treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). This multisite, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted between April 2006 and November 2010 at the Tuscaloosa and Birmingham Veterans Affairs Medical Centers in Alabama. US military veterans who met DSM-IV criteria for PTSD were randomly assigned to placebo (n = 39) or mirtazapine (n = 39) titrated up to 45 mg/d for an 8-week double-blind period followed by an 8-week open-label phase of mirtazapine treatment. The primary outcome efficacy measure was the Structured Interview for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (SIP). Secondary measures included other measures of PTSD, depression, and sleep. Analyses of treatment groups involved mixed-model procedures using a random intercept to test the hypotheses that mirtazapine would be more effective than placebo in reducing symptoms of PTSD and depression and improving quality of sleep. Seventy-eight participants were randomized with 61 completing the 8-week controlled phase and 48 completing the open-label phase. No significant differences were observed between groups on the primary outcome of SIP scores during the controlled phase (P = .418). In secondary outcomes, significant improvements per the Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement scale were found for the mirtazapine group compared to the placebo group (P = .041). The 8-week open-label phase demonstrated significant symptom improvement in SIP total score (P = .0003) and in scores on the SIP re-experiencing (P = .0007), avoidance (P = .0309), and hyperarousal (P = .0014) subscales. There were no significant differences in the occurrence of adverse events between groups. This study did not show efficacy of mirtazapine monotherapy in the treatment of PTSD. Identification of more effective treatments, either as monotherapy or adjunctive, for PTSD is imperative. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00302107.