Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 1.425
Filtrar
1.
Trials ; 21(1): 943, 2020 Nov 23.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33225970

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: Primary Objective • To assess the efficacy of herbal extracts in boosting innate immunity of patients with COVID-19 infection. Secondary Objectives • To assess the efficacy of herbal extracts in restoring respiratory health • To assess the efficacy of Cap. IP in early recovery of patients and decline in viral load • To assess the safety of herbal extracts TRIAL DESIGN: This is a single centre, randomized, 2-arm, parallel group, double blind, 1:1 ratio, controlled, exploratory trial with a study period of 30 days from the day of enrolment. PARTICIPANTS: Patients attending the COVID treatment centre at Yashwantrao Chavan Memorial Hospital, Nehrunagar, Pimpri, Pune, India were screened for their participation in the study. Patients who were known COVID-19 positive (with positive RT-PCR), eligible and willing were enrolled in the study. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: The intervention in the trial has a background in 'Ayurved'. Intervention Arm: Two capsules, Investigational Product (IP) - 1 - 400mg and Investigational Product - 2 - 450mg, containing herbal extracts (a blend of water and CO2 extracts) of Shunthi (Zingiber officinale (Ginger), Vidanga (Embelia ribes), Yashtimadhu (Glycyrrhiza glabra), Haritaki (Terminalia chebula), Guduchi (Tinospora cordifolia), Shatavari (Asparagus racemosus), Aamalaki (Emblica officinalis), Pippali (Piper longum) and calcined Zinc, Shankha bhasma. Placebo Arm: Edible starch ~ 450 mg. The look and feel of IP and of Placebo boxes were very similar. Patients are to take two capsules (one each of IP-1 and IP-2) twice a day for 15 days, and from the 16th day, one capsule of IP-2 twice a day up-to day 30. Capsules are to be administered orally with plain water. The IP is to be taken with all other concomitant medicines prescribed by the treating physician/doctor. The dose of each component in the IP is very safe to administer. The investigational products are registered products with the Indian Government and have been used for more than 6 months in various health conditions but not for COVID-19. MAIN OUTCOMES: Primary Outcome: Efficacy of the herbal extracts in COVID 19 positive patients (in declining viral load: time-point: 4 days and early recovery) Secondary Outcomes: Efficacy of the herbal extracts as an immune-modulator - TH1, TH2, Th17, IL6, NK Cells and CD markers; Immunoglobulin IGG (Serum); Immunoglobulin IGM (Serum) - at 30 days. Efficacy of the investigational product in reducing sequela of the disease Safety analysis (Liver Function Test and Kidney Function Test) including serious allergic reaction of: rash, itching/swelling, severe dizziness, trouble breathing. RANDOMISATION: An alphanumeric coded set of IP/Placebo containers will be used. Participants will be automatically randomized to two groups in the ratio 1:1. BLINDING (MASKING): Participants, caregivers and investigators were blinded. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): A total of more than 60 and up to 75 patients were to be enrolled in the study into the two groups, considering drop-outs. 72 were enrolled with 37 into the intervention group and 35 into the placebo group. TRIAL STATUS: Protocol number: CoviQuest-01 Protocol version number: 1.2 Protocol Date: 1st July 2020 The recruitment period is completed for the trial. Date of 1st patient enrolment was 11th Aug 2020 and the last patient was enrolled on 3rd of September 2020. This is to state that it was a late submission from authors for publication of the protocol to the BMC, after enrolment in the study was over. Last Participant's last follow-up is scheduled on 5th October 2020 TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was prospectively registered with the CTRI (Clinical Trial Registry of India). Registration number is CTRI/2020/07/026570 . Registered on 14 July 2020 FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.


Assuntos
Betacoronavirus/efeitos dos fármacos , Infecções por Coronavirus/tratamento farmacológico , Infecções por Coronavirus/imunologia , Imunidade Inata/efeitos dos fármacos , Extratos Vegetais/uso terapêutico , Pneumonia Viral/tratamento farmacológico , Pneumonia Viral/imunologia , Administração Oral , Betacoronavirus/genética , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/virologia , Humanos , Índia/epidemiologia , Pandemias , Placebos/administração & dosagem , Extratos Vegetais/administração & dosagem , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Pneumonia Viral/virologia , Segurança , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Resultado do Tratamento , Carga Viral/efeitos dos fármacos
2.
Trials ; 21(1): 942, 2020 Nov 23.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33225989

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate a therapeutic role for omega-3 fatty acid supplementation in the treatment of olfactory dysfunction associated with COVID-19 infection TRIAL DESIGN: Randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial PARTICIPANTS: Eligible patients are adults with self-reported new-onset olfactory dysfunction of any duration associated with laboratory-confirmed or clinically suspected COVID-19 patients. Exclusion criteria include patients with pre-existing olfactory dysfunction, history of chronic rhinosinusitis or history of sinus surgery, current use of nasal steroid sprays or omega-3 supplementation, fish allergy, or inability to provide informed consent for any reason. The trial is conducted at Mount Sinai Hospital INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: The intervention group will receive 2000 mg daily of omega-3 supplementation in the form of two "Fish Oil, Ultra Omega-3" capsules (product of Pharmavite®) daily. The comparator group will take 2 placebo capsules of identical size, shape, and odor daily for 6 weeks. MAIN OUTCOMES: Each subject will take a Brief Smell Identification Test at study enrolment and completion after 6 weeks. The primary outcome will be change in Brief Smell Identification Test over the 6-week period. RANDOMISATION: Patients will be randomized by the Investigational Drug Pharmacy at the Icahn School of Medicine at Sinai via a computer-generated sequence in a 1:1 allocation to treatment or control arms. BLINDING (MASKING): Both participants and researchers will be blinded. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): There will be 88 participants randomized to each group. A total of 176 participants will be randomized. TRIAL STATUS: Protocol Version 1, 8/3/2020 Recruitment is ongoing, started 8/5/2020 with estimated completion 11/30/2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov with Protocol Identifier: NCT04495816 . TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04495816 . Registered 3 August 2020 FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1).


Assuntos
Infecções por Coronavirus/complicações , Suplementos Nutricionais/efeitos adversos , Ácidos Graxos Ômega-3/uso terapêutico , Transtornos do Olfato/tratamento farmacológico , Pneumonia Viral/complicações , Betacoronavirus/genética , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/virologia , Suplementos Nutricionais/estatística & dados numéricos , Método Duplo-Cego , Ácidos Graxos Ômega-3/administração & dosagem , Humanos , New York/epidemiologia , Transtornos do Olfato/etiologia , Pandemias , Placebos/administração & dosagem , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Pneumonia Viral/virologia , Olfato/efeitos dos fármacos , Olfato/fisiologia
3.
Trials ; 21(1): 882, 2020 Oct 26.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33106171

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: We will evaluate the efficacy and safety of Melatonin, compared to the standard therapeutic regimen on clinical symptoms and serum inflammatory parameters in patients with confirmed COVID-19, who are moderately ill. TRIAL DESIGN: This is a single-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial with a parallel-group design conducted at Shahid Mohammadi Hospital, Bandar Abbas, Iran. PARTICIPANTS: All patients admitted to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Departments of Shahid Mohammadi Hospital, Bandar Abbas, Iran will be screened for the following criteria. INCLUSION CRITERIA: 1. Age ≥20 years 2. Confirmed SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis (positive polymerase chain reaction). 3. Moderate COVID-19 pneumonia (via computed tomography and or X-ray imaging), requiring hospitalization. 4. Hospitalized ≤48 hours. 5. Signing informed consent and willingness of the participant to accept randomization to any assigned treatment arm. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: 1. Underlying diseases, including chronic hypertension, diabetes mellitus, seizure, depression, chronic hepatitis, cirrhosis, and cholestatic liver diseases. 2. Severe and critical COVID-19 pneumonia. 3. Use of warfarin, corticosteroids, hormonal drugs, alcohol, other antiviral and investigational medicines, and illegal drugs (during the last 30 days). 4. History of known allergy to Melatonin. 5. Pregnancy and breastfeeding. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Intervention group: The standard treatment regimen for COVID-19, according to the Iranian Ministry of Health and Medical Education's protocol, along with Melatonin capsules at a dose of 50 mg daily for a period of seven days. CONTROL GROUP: The standard therapeutic regimen for COVID-19 along with Melatonin-like placebo capsules at a dose of one capsule daily for a period of seven days. Both Melatonin and placebo capsules were prepared at the Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Hormozgan University of Medical Sciences, Bandar Abbas, Iran. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary outcomes are the recovery rate of clinical symptoms and oxygen saturation as well as improvement of serum inflammatory parameters, including C-reactive protein, tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-ɑ), interleukin-1ß (IL-1ß), and IL-6 within seven days of randomization. The secondary outcomes are the time to improve clinical and paraclinical features along with the incidence of serious adverse drug reactions within seven days of randomization. RANDOMIZATION: Included patients will be allocated to one of the study arms using block randomization in a 1:1 ratio (each block consists of 10 patients). This randomization method ensures a balanced allocation between the arms during the study. A web-based system will generate random numbers for the allocation sequence and concealment of participants. Each number relates to one of the study arms. BLINDING (MASKING): All study participants, clinicians, nurses, research coordinators, and those analyzing the data are blinded to the group assignment. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMIZED (SAMPLE SIZE): A total of 60 patients randomized into two groups (30 in each group). TRIAL STATUS: The trial protocol is Version 1.0, August 14, 2020. Recruitment began August 22, 2020, and is anticipated to be completed by November 30, 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial protocol has been registered in the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (IRCT). The registration number is " IRCT20200506047323N5 ". The registration date was 14 August 2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting the dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.


Assuntos
Betacoronavirus/efeitos dos fármacos , Depressores do Sistema Nervoso Central/uso terapêutico , Infecções por Coronavirus/tratamento farmacológico , Melatonina/uso terapêutico , Pneumonia Viral/tratamento farmacológico , Adulto , Betacoronavirus/genética , Biomarcadores/sangue , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Depressores do Sistema Nervoso Central/administração & dosagem , Depressores do Sistema Nervoso Central/efeitos adversos , Infecções por Coronavirus/diagnóstico , Infecções por Coronavirus/virologia , Método Duplo-Cego , Hospitalização , Humanos , Irã (Geográfico)/epidemiologia , Melatonina/administração & dosagem , Melatonina/efeitos adversos , Oxigênio/sangue , Pandemias , Placebos/administração & dosagem , Pneumonia Viral/diagnóstico , Pneumonia Viral/virologia , Segurança , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento
4.
Trials ; 21(1): 848, 2020 Oct 13.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33050945

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to investigate the effect of Famotidine on the recovery process of COVID-19 patients. TRIAL DESIGN: This phase III randomized clinical trial was designed with two parallel arms, placebo-controlled, single-blind, and concealed allocation. PARTICIPANTS: All COVID-19 patients admitted to Shahid Mohammadi Hospital in Bandar Abbas whose PCR test results are positive for SARS-Cov-2 and sign the written consent of the study are included in the study and immunocompromised patients, end-stage renal disease, moderate renal failure (clearance Creatinine 30 to 50 ml/min) or stage 4 severe chronic kidney disease or need for dialysis (creatinine clearance lesser than 30 ml/min), history of liver disease, hepatitis C infection or alcoholism, Glucose 6 phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency(G6PD), the ratio of Alanine transaminase to Aspartate transaminase 5 times above the normal limit, history or evidence of long QT segment on Electrocardiogram, psoriasis or porphyria, pregnancy, use of oral contraceptives, Dasatinib, Neratinib, Ozanimod, Pazopanib, Rilpivirine, Siponimod and/or Tizanidine and allergies to any study drug are excluded. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Intervention group receives standard pharmacotherapy according to the treatment protocols of the National Committee of COVID-19 and oral famotidine 160 mg (Manufactured by Chemidarou Pharmaceutical Company) four times a day until the day of discharge, for a maximum of fourteen days. Comparator group receives standard drug therapy according to the treatment protocols of the National Committee of COVID-19 and placebo in the same dosage. MAIN OUTCOMES: Patients' temperature, respiration rate, oxygen saturation, lung infiltration, lactate dehydrogenase and complete blood count were measured at the baseline (before the intervention) and on day 14 after the intervention or on the discharge day. RANDOMISATION: The person who has no role in admitting patients and assigning patients to random codes preparing random sequences using online tools and by permuted block randomization method. Eligibility criteria are monitored by the person responsible for admitting patients. Codes in a random sequence are assigned to patients by the treatment team without knowing that each code is in the intervention or comparator group. Patient codes are then matched to randomly generated sequence information for interventions. BLINDING (MASKING): All participants are unaware of which group of this study they are in and after grouping patients in the groups, Patients receive Famotidine in the treatment group and receive a placebo in the control group. The lead researcher, care givers, data collectors, and outcome assessors are aware of the grouping of patients. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): As there is no prior work on this research question, so no assumptions for the sample size calculation could be made. A total of 20 patients participate in this study, which are randomly divided into two groups of 10 as intervention or control groups. TRIAL STATUS: Version 3 of the protocol was approved by the Deputy of Research and Technology and the ethics committee of Hormozgan University of Medical Sciences on August 2, 2020, with the local code 990245, and the recruitment started on August 17, 2020. recruitment ended on August 31, 2020. Since the recruitment ended earlier than expected (the expected recruitment end date was 21/12/2020), we submitted post recruitment but prior to publication of the results. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol was registered before starting subject recruitment under the title: The effect of Famotidine on the improvement of patients with COVID-19, IRCT20200509047364N2, at Iranian Registry of clinical trials ( https://www.irct.ir/trial/49657 ) on 17 August 2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol. The study protocol has been reported in accordance with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Clinical Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) guidelines (Additional file 2).


Assuntos
Betacoronavirus/efeitos dos fármacos , Infecções por Coronavirus/tratamento farmacológico , Famotidina/uso terapêutico , Antagonistas dos Receptores Histamínicos H2/uso terapêutico , Pneumonia Viral/tratamento farmacológico , Betacoronavirus/genética , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Protocolos Clínicos , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/virologia , Famotidina/efeitos adversos , Antagonistas dos Receptores Histamínicos H2/efeitos adversos , Hospitalização/tendências , Humanos , Irã (Geográfico)/epidemiologia , Avaliação de Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde/tendências , Pandemias , Alta do Paciente , Placebos/administração & dosagem , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Pneumonia Viral/virologia
5.
Trials ; 21(1): 847, 2020 Oct 13.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33050947

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: Primary objective: To determine the efficacy of a candidate antiviral on time to virological cure compared to standard of care within 14 days of randomisation Secondary objectives: • To determine the safety of the antiviral • To determine the clinical benefit of the antiviral over placebo according to the WHO 7-point ordinal scale • To determine the clinical benefit of the antiviral over placebo on time to resolution of clinical symptoms • To determine the effect of the antiviral over placebo on biomarkers of inflammation and immune activation TRIAL DESIGN: This is a multi-centre, triple-blind, randomised placebo controlled phase II, 2-arm trial with parallel-group design with allocation ratio 1:1. PARTICIPANTS: Inclusion Criteria: • Provision of informed consent by the participant • Age ≥18 years • Confirmed SARS-CoV-2 by nucleic acid testing in the past 5 days • COVID-19 related symptom initiation within 5 days • Female patients of childbearing potential must have a negative pregnancy test at Screening. Female patients of childbearing potential and fertile male patients who are sexually active with a female of childbearing potential must use highly effective methods of contraception throughout the study and for 1 week following the last dose of study treatment. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: • Known allergy to the study medication • Is on another clinical trial investigating an antiviral treatment for COVID-19 • Pregnancy • Patients with severe hepatic dysfunction equivalent to Grade C in the Child-Pugh classification • Patients with renal impairment requiring dialysis • Is deemed by the Investigator to be ineligible for any reason Participants will be recruited from, and the study visits will take place at Alfred Hospital, Monash Health, Austin Health in Victoria, Australia for hospitalised participants as well as recruitment in the community in participants homes for eligible people not requiring hospitalisation. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: The first candidate antiviral is favipiravir Arm 1: Favipiravir 1800 mg favipiravir BD on Day 1 followed by 800 mg BD favipiravir for the next 13 days. Arm 2: Placebo MAIN OUTCOMES: Primary outcome: Time to virological cure as defined by 2 successive throat (or combined nose/throat) swabs negative for SARS-CoV-2 by nucleic acid testing during the 14 days after enrolment. RANDOMISATION: Randomisation performed at the Alfred Hospital Clinical Trials Pharmacy using computer generated block-randomisation lists with 6 participants per block. Within each block half of the participants will be randomised to the candidate antiviral and the other half to placebo. Randomisation is stratified by study site, with participants enrolled in the community considered as a study site. BLINDING (MASKING): Study participants, study investigators and the study statistician will be blinded to treatment allocation. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): The study aims to recruit 190 people (95/arm) with the first candidate antiviral favipiravir TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version 2.0 Dated 31-Jul-2020. Recruitment will take place between July 2020 and December 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov NCT04445467 First posted 24-Jun-2020 FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.


Assuntos
Amidas/uso terapêutico , Antivirais/uso terapêutico , Betacoronavirus/efeitos dos fármacos , Infecções por Coronavirus/tratamento farmacológico , Pneumonia Viral/tratamento farmacológico , Pirazinas/uso terapêutico , Amidas/efeitos adversos , Antivirais/efeitos adversos , Austrália/epidemiologia , Betacoronavirus/genética , Biomarcadores/metabolismo , Protocolos Clínicos , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/virologia , Feminino , Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Pandemias , Placebos/administração & dosagem , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Pneumonia Viral/virologia , Pirazinas/efeitos adversos , Segurança , Resultado do Tratamento
6.
Trials ; 21(1): 853, 2020 Oct 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33059771

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of two doses of the adsorbed vaccine COVID-19 (inactivated) produced by Sinovac in symptomatic individuals, with virological confirmation of COVID-19, two weeks after the completion of the two-dose vaccination regimen, aged 18 years or older who work as health professionals providing care to patients with possible or confirmed COVID-19. To describe the occurrence of adverse reactions associated with the administration of each of two doses of the adsorbed vaccine COVID-19 (inactivated) produced by Sinovac up to one week after vaccination in Adults (18-59 years of age) and Elderly (60 years of age or more). TRIAL DESIGN: This is a Phase III, randomized, multicenter, endpoint driven, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial to assess the efficacy and safety of the adsorbed vaccine COVID-19 (inactivated) produced by Sinovac. The adsorbed vaccine COVID-19 (inactivated) produced by Sinovac (product under investigation) will be compared to placebo. Voluntary participants will be randomized to receive two intramuscular doses of the investigational product or the placebo, in a 1: 1 ratio, stratified by age group (18 to 59 years and 60 years or more) and will be monitored for one year by active surveillance of COVID-19. Two databases will be established according to the age groups: one for adults (18-59 years) and one for the elderly (60 years of age or older). The threshold to consider the vaccine efficacious will be to reach a protection level of at least 50%, as proposed by the World Health Organization and the FDA. Success in this criterion will be defined by sequential monitoring with adjustment of the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval above 30% for the primary efficacy endpoint. PARTICIPANTS: Healthy participants and / or participants with clinically controlled disease, of both genders, 18 years of age or older, working as health professionals performing care in units specialized in direct contact with people with possible or confirmed cases of COVID-19. Participation of pregnant women and those who are breastfeeding, as well as those intending to become pregnant within three months after vaccination will not be allowed. Participants will only be included after signing the voluntary Informed Consent Form and ensuring they undergo screening evaluation and conform to all the inclusion and exclusion criteria. All the clinical sites are located in Brazil. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Experimental intervention: The vaccine was manufactured by Sinovac Life Sciences (Beijing, China) and contains 3 µg/0.5 mL (equivalent to 600 SU per dose) of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 virus, and aluminium hydroxide as adjuvant. Control comparator: The placebo contains aluminium hydroxide in a 0.5 mL solution The schedule of both, experimental intervention and placebo is two 0.5 mL doses IM (deltoid) with a two week interval. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary efficacy endpoint is the incidence of symptomatic cases of virologically confirmed COVID-19 two weeks after the second vaccination. The virological diagnosis will be confirmed by detection of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid in a clinical sample. The primary safety endpoint is the frequency of solicited and unsolicited local and systemic adverse reactions during the period of one week after vaccination according to age group in adult (18-59 years old) and elder (60 years of age or older) subjects. Adverse reactions are defined as adverse events that have a reasonable causal relationship to vaccination. RANDOMISATION: There will be two randomization lists, one for each age group, based on the investigational products to be administered, i.e., vaccine or placebo at a 1: 1 ratio. Each randomization list will be made to include up to 11,800 (18-59 year-old) adults, and 1,260 elderly (60 y-o and older) participants, the maximum number of participants needed per age group. An electronic central randomization system will be used to designate the investigational product that each participant must receive. BLINDING (MASKING): This trial is designed as a double-blind study to avoid introducing bias in the evaluation of efficacy, safety and immunogenicity. The clinical care team, the professionals responsible for the vaccination and the participants will not know which investigational product will be administered. Only pharmacists or nurses in the study who are responsible for the randomization, separation and blinding of the investigational product will have access to unblinded information. The sponsor's operational team will also remain blind. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): The total number of participants needed to evaluate efficacy, 13,060 participants, satisfies the needed sample size calculated to evaluate safety. Therefore, the total number obtained for efficacy will be the number retained for the study. Up to 13,060 participants are expected to enter the study, with up to 11,800 participants aged 18 to 59 years and 1,260 elderly participants aged 60 and over. Half of the participants of each group will receive the experimental vaccine and half of them will receive the placebo. The recruitment of participants may be modified as recommended by the Data Safety Monitoring Committee at time of the interim unblinded analysis or blind assessment of the COVID-19 attack rate during the study. TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version 2.0 - 24-Aug-2020. Recruitment started on July 21st, 2020. The recruitment is expected to conclude in October 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0445659 . Registry on 2 July 2020 FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.


Assuntos
Betacoronavirus/genética , Infecções por Coronavirus/prevenção & controle , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , Pneumonia Viral/prevenção & controle , Vacinação/métodos , Vacinas/uso terapêutico , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Betacoronavirus/imunologia , Brasil/epidemiologia , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/imunologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/virologia , Gerenciamento de Dados , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Pessoal de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Incidência , Consentimento Livre e Esclarecido/ética , Injeções Intramusculares , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Placebos/administração & dosagem , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Pneumonia Viral/imunologia , Pneumonia Viral/virologia , Segurança , Terapias em Estudo/métodos , Resultado do Tratamento , Vacinas/administração & dosagem , Vacinas/efeitos adversos , Adulto Jovem
7.
Trials ; 21(1): 867, 2020 Oct 20.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33081817

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: There is an urgent need for treatments that can shorten hospitalization and lower the risk of secondary infection and death in patients with corona disease. The ProPac-COVID trial evaluates whether combination therapy with macrolide azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine via anti-inflammation/immune modulation, antiviral efficacy, and pre-emptive treatment of supra-infections can shorten hospitalization duration and reduce the risk of non-invasive ventilation, treatment in the intensive care unit, and death in patients with acute hospital admission and a positive test for 2019-nCoV and symptoms of COVID-19 disease. METHODS: The ProPAC-COVID is a multi-center, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded clinical trial. The primary outcome is number of days spent alive and out of hospital within 14 days from randomization. Randomization will be in blocks of unknown size, and the final allocation will be stratified for age, site of recruitment, and whether the patient has any chronic lung diseases. Data is analyzed using intention-to-treat (ITT) principles, and main analyses will also be subject to modified ITT analysis and per protocol analysis. DISCUSSION: This paper describes the detailed statistical analysis plan for the evaluation of primary and secondary endpoints of the ProPAC-COVID study. Enrolment of patients to the ProPAC-COVID study is still ongoing. The purpose of this paper is to provide primary publication of study results to prevent selective reporting of outcomes, data-driven analysis, and to increase transparency. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04322396 . Registered on 26 March 2020.


Assuntos
Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Antimaláricos/uso terapêutico , Azitromicina/uso terapêutico , Betacoronavirus/efeitos dos fármacos , Infecções por Coronavirus/prevenção & controle , Hidroxicloroquina/uso terapêutico , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , Pneumonia Viral/prevenção & controle , Idoso , Antibacterianos/efeitos adversos , Antibioticoprofilaxia/métodos , Antimaláricos/efeitos adversos , Azitromicina/efeitos adversos , Betacoronavirus/genética , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/transmissão , Infecções por Coronavirus/virologia , Dinamarca/epidemiologia , Método Duplo-Cego , Quimioterapia Combinada , Feminino , Mortalidade Hospitalar/tendências , Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Hidroxicloroquina/efeitos adversos , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva/estatística & dados numéricos , Análise de Intenção de Tratamento/métodos , Masculino , Ventilação não Invasiva/efeitos adversos , Placebos/administração & dosagem , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Pneumonia Viral/transmissão , Pneumonia Viral/virologia , Comportamento de Redução do Risco
8.
Trials ; 21(1): 876, 2020 Oct 22.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33092653

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To investigates the effectiveness of curcumin-containing Nanomicelles as a therapeutic supplement in the treatment of patients with COVID-19 and its effect on immune responses balance changes following treatment. TRIAL DESIGN: This study is conducted as a prospective, placebo-controlled with parallel group, single-center randomized clinical trial on COVID-19 patients. PARTICIPANTS: Patients are selected from the COVID-19 ward of Shahid Mohammadi Hospital in Bandar Abbas, Iran. INCLUSION CRITERIA: 1. Real time PCR-approved positive COVID-19 test. 2. Both gender 3. Age between 18 and 75 years 4. Signing a written consent 5. Lack of participation in other clinical trials Exclusion criteria: 1. Pregnancy or lactation 2. Allergy to turmeric or curcumin 3. Smoking 4. Patient connected to the ventilator 5. SaO2 less than 90% or PaO2 less than 8 kPa 6. Having comorbidities (such as severe renal failure, Glomerular filtration rate less than 30 ml/min, liver failure, Congestive heart failure, or Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) 7. History of gallstones 8. History of gastritis or active gastrointestinal ulcer INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: In addition to the routine standard treatments for COVID-19, in the intervention group, 40mg nanomicelles containing curcumin (SinaCurcumin Capsule, Exir Nano Sina Company, Iran), four times per day (after breakfast, lunch, dinner and before bedtime) and in the placebo group as the control group, capsules with the same appearance and characteristics (Placebo capsules, Exir Nano Sina Company, Iran) are prescribed for two weeks. MAIN OUTCOMES: The effectiveness of Nano micelles containing curcumin treatment will be evaluated as daily clinical examinations of patients in both groups and, on days 0, 7 and 14, complete clinical symptoms and laboratory findings including peripheral blood and serum parameters such as inflammatory markers will be measured and recorded. Moreover, in order to evaluate the balance of immune responses changes following treatments, serum level of IFN-γ, IL-17, Il-4 and TGF-ß serum cytokines will be measured in both groups at time points of 0, 7 and 14 days post treatment. Gene expression of t-bet, GATA-3, FoxP3 and ROR- γT will also be measured at mentioned time points to assess the shift of T helper1, T helper2, T regulatory and T helper 17 immune responses following treatment. RANDOMISATION: Randomized trials will be performed on 40 COVID-19 patients which will be randomized using encoded sealed boxes with computer generated random digits with 1:1 allocation ratio. In order to randomization, placebo and SinaCurcumin Capsules will be numbered first by computer generated random digits. SinaCurcumin and placebo will then be stored and numbered in sealed packages based on generated random numbers. Finally, according to the order in which patients enter the study, packages are given to patients based on their number. BLINDING (MASKING): The present study will be blind for all patients, physicians and nurses, laboratory technicians and statisticians. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): A total of 40 patients will be included in the study, 20 of them will be randomly assigned to the intervention group and 20 to the placebo group. TRIAL STATUS: This is Version 1.0 of protocol dated 21 May 2020. The recruitment was started June 24, 2020 and is expected to be completed by October 31, 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This present clinical trial has been registered in the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (IRCT) with the registration code of "IRCT20200611047735N1", https://www.irct.ir/trial/48843 . Dated: 19 June 2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.


Assuntos
Betacoronavirus/efeitos dos fármacos , Corantes/uso terapêutico , Infecções por Coronavirus/tratamento farmacológico , Curcumina/uso terapêutico , Pneumonia Viral/tratamento farmacológico , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Betacoronavirus/genética , Betacoronavirus/imunologia , Biomarcadores/metabolismo , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Corantes/efeitos adversos , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/imunologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/virologia , Curcumina/efeitos adversos , Suplementos Nutricionais/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Expressão Gênica/genética , Humanos , Interleucinas/imunologia , Irã (Geográfico)/epidemiologia , Masculino , Micelas , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pandemias , Placebos/administração & dosagem , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Pneumonia Viral/imunologia , Pneumonia Viral/virologia , Estudos Prospectivos , Resultado do Tratamento , Adulto Jovem
9.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 99(43): e22872, 2020 Oct 23.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33120828

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Shock is a major public health problem worldwide. At present, the morbidity and mortality of shock patients are relatively high. Vasomotor dysfunction is 1 of the key pathological aspects of shock. Shenfu injection has been widely used for the treatment of shock in China. Pharmacological studies have suggested that Shenfu injection can reduce peripheral circulation resistance and improve microcirculation. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect and safety of Shenfu injection on the microcirculation of patients with shock. METHODS: This review summarizes and meta-analyzes randomized controlled trials of Shenfu injection for the treatment of shock.Searched the following electronic databases: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, CNKI, VIP and Wanfang Data. The Cochrane risk assessment tool was used to evaluate the methodological quality of randomized controlled trials. All tests are analyzed according to the standards of the Cochrane Handbook. Review Manager 5.3, R-3.5.1 software and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation pro GDT web solution are used for data synthesis and analysis. RESULTS: This review focuses on the effects of Shenfu injection on the microcirculation of shock patients (blood lactic acid level, arteriovenous oxygen saturation, arteriovenous carbon dioxide partial pressure difference, sublingual microcirculation), 28-day mortality, 28-day ICU hospitalization and adverse reaction rate. CONCLUSION: This review provides a clear basis for evaluating the impact of Shenfu injection on the microcirculation of shock patients, as well as the effectiveness and safety of the treatment.


Assuntos
Medicamentos de Ervas Chinesas/uso terapêutico , Microcirculação/efeitos dos fármacos , Choque/tratamento farmacológico , Estudos de Casos e Controles , China/epidemiologia , Medicamentos de Ervas Chinesas/administração & dosagem , Medicamentos de Ervas Chinesas/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Hospitalização/tendências , Humanos , Injeções/métodos , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva/estatística & dados numéricos , Masculino , Placebos/administração & dosagem , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Segurança , Choque/mortalidade , Resultado do Tratamento
10.
Pediatrics ; 146(4)2020 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32887793

RESUMO

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Children born preterm experience socioemotional difficulties, including increased risk of autism spectrum disorder (ASD). In this secondary analysis, we tested the effect of combined docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and arachidonic acid (AA) supplementation during toddlerhood on caregiver-reported socioemotional outcomes of children born preterm. We hypothesized that children randomly assigned to DHA + AA would display better socioemotional outcomes compared with those randomly assigned to a placebo. METHODS: Omega Tots was a single-site randomized, fully masked, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial. Children (N = 377) were 10 to 16 months at enrollment, born at <35 weeks' gestation, and assigned to 180 days of daily 200-mg DHA + 200-mg AA supplementation or a placebo (400 mg corn oil). Caregivers completed the Brief Infant-Toddler Social and Emotional Assessment and the Pervasive Developmental Disorders Screening Test-II, Stage 2 at the end of the trial. Liner mixed models and log-binomial regression compared socioemotional outcomes between the DHA + AA and placebo groups. RESULTS: Outcome data were available for 83% of children (n treatment = 161; n placebo = 153). Differences between DHA + AA and placebo groups on Brief Infant-Toddler Social and Emotional Assessment scores were of small magnitude (Cohen's d ≤ 0.15) and not statistically significant. Children randomly assigned to DHA + AA had a decreased risk of scoring at-risk for ASD on the Pervasive Developmental Disorders Screening Test-II, Stage 2 (21% vs 32%; risk ratio = 0.66 [95% confidence interval: 0.45 to 0.97]; risk difference = -0.11 [95% confidence interval: -0.21 to -0.01]) compared with children randomly assigned to a placebo. CONCLUSIONS: No evidence of benefit of DHA + AA supplementation on caregiver-reported outcomes of broad socioemotional development was observed. Supplementation resulted in decreased risk of clinical concern for ASD. Further exploration in larger samples of preterm children and continued follow-up of children who received DHA + AA supplementation as they approach school age is warranted.


Assuntos
Ácido Araquidônico/administração & dosagem , Transtorno do Espectro Autista/prevenção & controle , Desenvolvimento Infantil/efeitos dos fármacos , Suplementos Nutricionais , Ácidos Docosa-Hexaenoicos/administração & dosagem , Intervalos de Confiança , Feminino , Idade Gestacional , Humanos , Lactente , Recém-Nascido Prematuro , Masculino , Adesão à Medicação , Placebos/administração & dosagem , Fatores Sexuais , Resultado do Tratamento
11.
Lancet ; 396(10254): 830-838, 2020 09 19.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32877651

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Angina might persist or reoccur despite successful revascularisation with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and antianginal therapy. Additionally, PCI in stable patients has not been shown to improve survival compared with optimal medical therapy. Trimetazidine is an antianginal agent that improves energy metabolism of the ischaemic myocardium and might improve outcomes and symptoms of patients who recently had a PCI. In this study, we aimed to assess the long-term potential benefits and safety of trimetazidine added to standard evidence-based medical treatment in patients who had a recent successful PCI. METHODS: We did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, event-driven trial of trimetazidine added to standard background therapy in patients who had undergone successful PCI at 365 centres in 27 countries across Europe, South America, Asia, and north Africa. Eligible patients were aged 21-85 years and had had either elective PCI for stable angina or urgent PCI for unstable angina or non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction less than 30 days before randomisation. Patients were randomly assigned by an interactive web response system to oral trimetazidine 35 mg modified-release twice daily or matching placebo. Participants, study investigators, and all study staff were masked to treatment allocation. The primary efficacy endpoint was a composite of cardiac death; hospital admission for a cardiac event; recurrence or persistence of angina requiring an addition, switch, or increase of the dose of at least one antianginal drug; or recurrence or persistence of angina requiring a coronary angiography. Efficacy analyses were done according to the intention-to-treat principle. Safety was assessed in all patients who had at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with the EU Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT 2010-022134-89). FINDINGS: From Sept 17, 2014, to June 15, 2016, 6007 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive either trimetazidine (n=2998) or placebo (n=3009). After a median follow-up of 47·5 months (IQR 42·3-53·3), incidence of primary endpoint events was not significantly different between the trimetazidine group (700 [23·3%] patients) and the placebo group (714 [23·7%]; hazard ratio 0·98 [95% CI 0·88-1·09], p=0·73). When analysed individually, there were no significant differences in the incidence of the components of the primary endpoint between the treatment groups. Similar results were obtained when patients were categorised according to whether they had an elective or urgent PCI. 1219 (40·9%) of 2983 patients in the trimetazidine group and 1230 (41·1%) of 2990 patients in the placebo group had serious treatment-emergent adverse events. Frequencies of adverse events of interest were similar between the groups. INTERPRETATION: Our results show that the routine use of oral trimetazidine 35 mg twice daily over several years in patients receiving optimal medical therapy, after successful PCI, does not influence the recurrence of angina or the outcome; these findings should be taken into account when considering the place of trimetazidine in clinical practice. However, the long-term prescription of this treatment does not appear to be associated with any statistically significant safety concerns in the population studied. FUNDING: Servier.


Assuntos
Infarto do Miocárdio sem Supradesnível do Segmento ST/terapia , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/métodos , Trimetazidina/efeitos adversos , Vasodilatadores/efeitos adversos , Administração Oral , África do Norte/epidemiologia , Idoso , Angina Estável/terapia , Angina Instável/terapia , Ásia/epidemiologia , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Angiografia Coronária/métodos , Angiografia Coronária/estatística & dados numéricos , Morte , Europa (Continente)/epidemiologia , Feminino , Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/tendências , Placebos/administração & dosagem , Recidiva , Segurança , América do Sul/epidemiologia , Resultado do Tratamento , Trimetazidina/administração & dosagem , Trimetazidina/uso terapêutico , Vasodilatadores/administração & dosagem , Vasodilatadores/uso terapêutico
12.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 99(39): e22286, 2020 Sep 25.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32991431

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: At present, the effect of western-medicine (WM) therapy to treat diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) is limited. Moxibustion is a representative external treatment in traditional Chinese medicine that has been beneficial to DPN. We aim to systematically assess the efficacy and safety of moxibustion in treating DPN, following PRISMA guidelines. METHODS: Eight electronic databases were searched to acquire information on eligible trials published from inception to June 1, 2019. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) applying moxibustion therapy with a minimum of 14-days treatment duration for DPN patients compared with placebo, no intervention, or conventional WM interventions. The primary outcomes in our study include the sensory-nerve conduction velocity (SNCV) and motor-nerve conduction velocity (MNCV). We used the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias tool to assess the methodological quality of eligible RCTs. Statistical analyses were conducted using Review Manager 5.3. Risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD) were calculated with a 95% confidence interval (CI). The χ test was applied to assess the heterogeneity. RESULTS: In total, 11 RCTs were included that involved 927 DPN patients. Compared with the control group, there was an increase in median MNCV (MD = 6.26, 95% CI 2.64-9.89, Z = 3.39, P = .0007) and peroneal MNCV (MD = 6.45, 95% CI 5.30-7.61, P < .00001). There was also an increase in median SNCV (MD = 6.64, 95% CI 3.25-10.03, P = .0001) and peroneal SNCV (MD = 3. 57, 95% CI 2.06-5.09, Z = 4.63, P < .00001) in the treatment groups. The treatment groups receiving moxibustion therapy indicated a more significant improvement in total effectiveness rate (RR = 0.25, 95% CI 0.18-0.37, Z = 7.16, P < .00001). Toronto Clinical Scoring System indicated a significant decrease in the treatment groups (MD = -2.12, 95% CI -2.82 to 1.43, P < .00001). Only 1 study reported that treatment groups experienced no adverse reactions. The other 10 studies did not mention adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Moxibustion therapy may be an effective and safe option for DPN patients but needs to be verified in further rigorous studies.


Assuntos
Neuropatias Diabéticas/terapia , Medicina Tradicional Chinesa/métodos , Moxibustão/métodos , Condução Nervosa/efeitos dos fármacos , Adulto , Idoso , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Bases de Dados Factuais , Tratamento Farmacológico/normas , Duração da Terapia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Medicina Tradicional Chinesa/efeitos adversos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Moxibustão/efeitos adversos , Condução Nervosa/fisiologia , Nervo Fibular/fisiopatologia , Placebos/administração & dosagem , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Segurança , Resultado do Tratamento , Ocidente
13.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 9: CD009422, 2020 09 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32892350

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: People with cystic fibrosis are at an increased risk of fat-soluble vitamin deficiency, including vitamin E. Vitamin E deficiency can cause a host of conditions such as haemolytic anaemia, cerebellar ataxia and cognitive difficulties. Vitamin E supplementation is widely recommended for people with cystic fibrosis and aims to ameliorate this deficiency. This is an updated version of the review. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of any level of vitamin E supplementation on the frequency of vitamin E deficiency disorders in people with cystic fibrosis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register and also searched international online trial registries for any ongoing clinical trials that were not identified during our register search. Date of last search of the Register: 11 August 2020. Date of last search of international online trial registries: 20 July 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing any preparation of vitamin E supplementation to placebo or no supplement, regardless of dosage or duration. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors extracted outcome data from each study (published information) and assessed the risk of bias of each included study. They assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: Four studies with a total of 141 participants were included in the review, two of these were in children (aged six months to 14.5 years), and two did not specify participants' age. All studies used different formulations and doses of vitamin E for various durations of treatment (10 days to six months). Two studies compared the supplementation of fat-soluble as well as water-soluble formulations to no supplementation in different arms of the same study. A third study compared a water-soluble formulation to a placebo; and in the fourth study a fat-soluble formulation of vitamin E was assessed against placebo. There was limited detail about randomisation and blinding in the included studies which compromises the quality of the evidence base for the review. The heterogeneous mix of the formulations with differing biovailabilities among these studies also limits the generalisability of the data to the wider cystic fibrosis population. None of the studies in either comparison report the review's primary outcomes of vitamin E total lipid ratio or the incidence of vitamin E-specific deficiency disorders, or the secondary outcomes lung function or quality of life. Water-soluble vitamin E Water-soluble vitamin E may improve serum vitamin E levels compared with control at six months, one study (45 participants), mean difference (MD) 19.74 umol/L (95% confidence interval (CI) 13.48 to 26.00) (low-quality evidence). Similar results were also seen at one month, two studies (32 participants), MD 17.66 umol/L (95% CI 10.59 to 24.74) and at three months, one study (45 participants), MD 11.61 umol/L (95% CI 4.77 to 18.45). Only one study (45 participants) reported weight (secondary outcome of growth and nutritional status) at one and six months, but showed no difference between treatment and control at either time point. Fat-soluble vitamin E Two studies (36 participants) reported higher levels of serum vitamin E at one month with fat-soluble vitamin E compared with control, MD 13.59 umol/L (95% CI 9.52 to 17.66); however, at three months one study (36 participants) showed no difference between treatment and control. No studies in this comparison reported on growth or nutritional status. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Vitamin E supplementation may lead to an improvement in vitamin E levels in people with cystic fibrosis, although evidence we assessed was low quality. No data on other outcomes of interest were available to allow conclusions about any other benefits of this therapy. In future, larger studies are needed, especially in people already being treated with enteric-coated pancreatic enzymes and supplemented with vitamin E, to look at more specific outcome measures such as vitamin E status, lung function and nutritional status. Future studies could also look at the optimal dose of vitamin E required to achieve maximal clinical effectiveness.


Assuntos
Fibrose Cística/sangue , Suplementos Nutricionais , Vitamina E/administração & dosagem , Vitaminas/administração & dosagem , Adolescente , Adulto , Viés , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Insuficiência Pancreática Exócrina/complicações , Feminino , Humanos , Lactente , Masculino , Placebos/administração & dosagem , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Vitamina E/sangue , Vitamina E/química , Deficiência de Vitamina E/prevenção & controle , Vitaminas/química , alfa-Tocoferol/administração & dosagem
14.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 99(31): e21447, 2020 Jul 31.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32756163

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The comparative efficacy and safety of small molecule and biological agents in the treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) remain unknown. OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and safety of 14 small molecule and biological agents by network meta-analysis (NMA). METHODS: Relevant randomized controlled trials involving biological treatments for PsA were identified by searching PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Clinicaltrials.gov and by manual retrieval, up to June 2018. NMA was conducted with Stata 14.0 based on the frequentist method. Effect measures were odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Intervention efficacy and safety were ranked according to the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). RESULTS: A total of 30 studies involving 10,191 adult subjects were included. According to NMA, ≥ 20% improvement in modifed American College of Rheumatology response criteria (ACR20) response, Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75 (PASI75) response, and serious adverse events rate (SAEs) were observed. In direct comparisons, most of the biologics performed better than placebo in terms of ACR20 response rate and PASI75 response rate. Additionally, all medicines were comparable to placebo in terms of SAEs except secukinumab. In terms of mixed comparisons, with regard to the ACR20 response, etanercept (ETN) and infliximab (IFX) were more effective than golimumab (GOL), with ORs of 3.33 (95% CI: 1.17-9.48) and 1.24 (95% CI: 0.61-2.52), respectively. For PASI75 response, IFX was superior to certolizumab pegol (OR = 10.08, 95% CI: 1.54-75.48). In addition, these medicines were comparable to each other in terms of SAEs. ETN and IFX were shown to have the most favorable SUCRA for achieving improved ACR20 and PASI75 responses, respectively, while ABT-122 exhibited the best safety according to the SUCRA for SAEs. Considering both the efficacy (ACR20, PASI75) and safety (SAEs), GOL, ETN, and IFX are the top 3 treatments. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Direct and indirect comparisons and integrated results suggested that the 3 anti- tumor necrosis factor -α biologics (GOL, ETN, and IFX) can be considered the best treatments for PsA after comprehensive consideration of efficacy and safety.


Assuntos
Artrite Psoriásica/tratamento farmacológico , Fatores Biológicos/uso terapêutico , Fator de Necrose Tumoral alfa/antagonistas & inibidores , Adulto , Anticorpos Monoclonais/uso terapêutico , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/uso terapêutico , Fatores Biológicos/efeitos adversos , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Certolizumab Pegol/uso terapêutico , Etanercepte/uso terapêutico , Feminino , Humanos , Infliximab/uso terapêutico , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Metanálise em Rede , Placebos/administração & dosagem , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Segurança , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Resultado do Tratamento
15.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 8: CD007807, 2020 08 27.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32851663

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: A couple may be considered to have fertility problems if they have been trying to conceive for over a year with no success. This may affect up to a quarter of all couples planning a child. It is estimated that for 40% to 50% of couples, subfertility may result from factors affecting women. Antioxidants are thought to reduce the oxidative stress brought on by these conditions. Currently, limited evidence suggests that antioxidants improve fertility, and trials have explored this area with varied results. This review assesses the evidence for the effectiveness of different antioxidants in female subfertility. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether supplementary oral antioxidants compared with placebo, no treatment/standard treatment or another antioxidant improve fertility outcomes for subfertile women. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases (from their inception to September 2019), with no language or date restriction: Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group (CGFG) specialised register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and AMED. We checked reference lists of relevant studies and searched the trial registers. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared any type, dose or combination of oral antioxidant supplement with placebo, no treatment or treatment with another antioxidant, among women attending a reproductive clinic. We excluded trials comparing antioxidants with fertility drugs alone and trials that only included fertile women attending a fertility clinic because of male partner infertility. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. The primary review outcome was live birth; secondary outcomes included clinical pregnancy rates and adverse events. MAIN RESULTS: We included 63 trials involving 7760 women. Investigators compared oral antioxidants, including: combinations of antioxidants, N-acetylcysteine, melatonin, L-arginine, myo-inositol, carnitine, selenium, vitamin E, vitamin B complex, vitamin C, vitamin D+calcium, CoQ10, and omega-3-polyunsaturated fatty acids versus placebo, no treatment/standard treatment or another antioxidant. Only 27 of the 63 included trials reported funding sources. Due to the very low-quality of the evidence we are uncertain whether antioxidants improve live birth rate compared with placebo or no treatment/standard treatment (odds ratio (OR) 1.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.36 to 2.43; P < 0.001, I2 = 29%; 13 RCTs, 1227 women). This suggests that among subfertile women with an expected live birth rate of 19%, the rate among women using antioxidants would be between 24% and 36%. Low-quality evidence suggests that antioxidants may improve clinical pregnancy rate compared with placebo or no treatment/standard treatment (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.43 to 1.89; P < 0.001, I2 = 63%; 35 RCTs, 5165 women). This suggests that among subfertile women with an expected clinical pregnancy rate of 19%, the rate among women using antioxidants would be between 25% and 30%. Heterogeneity was moderately high. Overall 28 trials reported on various adverse events in the meta-analysis. The evidence suggests that the use of antioxidants makes no difference between the groups in rates of miscarriage (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.55; P = 0.46, I2 = 0%; 24 RCTs, 3229 women; low-quality evidence). There was also no evidence of a difference between the groups in rates of multiple pregnancy (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.56; P = 0.99, I2 = 0%; 9 RCTs, 1886 women; low-quality evidence). There was also no evidence of a difference between the groups in rates of gastrointestinal disturbances (OR 1.55, 95% CI 0.47 to 5.10; P = 0.47, I2 = 0%; 3 RCTs, 343 women; low-quality evidence). Low-quality evidence showed that there was also no difference between the groups in rates of ectopic pregnancy (OR 1.40, 95% CI 0.27 to 7.20; P = 0.69, I2 = 0%; 4 RCTs, 404 women). In the antioxidant versus antioxidant comparison, low-quality evidence shows no difference in a lower dose of melatonin being associated with an increased live-birth rate compared with higher-dose melatonin (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.15; P = 0.89, I2 = 0%; 2 RCTs, 140 women). This suggests that among subfertile women with an expected live-birth rate of 24%, the rate among women using a lower dose of melatonin compared to a higher dose would be between 12% and 40%. Similarly with clinical pregnancy, there was no evidence of a difference between the groups in rates between a lower and a higher dose of melatonin (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.15; P = 0.89, I2 = 0%; 2 RCTs, 140 women). Three trials reported on miscarriage in the antioxidant versus antioxidant comparison (two used doses of melatonin and one compared N-acetylcysteine versus L-carnitine). There were no miscarriages in either melatonin trial. Multiple pregnancy and gastrointestinal disturbances were not reported, and ectopic pregnancy was reported by only one trial, with no events. The study comparing N-acetylcysteine with L-carnitine did not report live birth rate. Very low-quality evidence shows no evidence of a difference in clinical pregnancy (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.33 to 2.00; 1 RCT, 164 women; low-quality evidence). Low quality evidence shows no difference in miscarriage (OR 1.54, 95% CI 0.42 to 5.67; 1 RCT, 164 women; low-quality evidence). The study did not report multiple pregnancy, gastrointestinal disturbances or ectopic pregnancy. The overall quality of evidence was limited by serious risk of bias associated with poor reporting of methods, imprecision and inconsistency. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In this review, there was low- to very low-quality evidence to show that taking an antioxidant may benefit subfertile women. Overall, there is no evidence of increased risk of miscarriage, multiple births, gastrointestinal effects or ectopic pregnancies, but evidence was of very low quality. At this time, there is limited evidence in support of supplemental oral antioxidants for subfertile women.


Assuntos
Antioxidantes/administração & dosagem , Infertilidade Feminina/tratamento farmacológico , Aborto Espontâneo/epidemiologia , Administração Oral , Antioxidantes/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Humanos , Nascimento Vivo/epidemiologia , Minerais/administração & dosagem , Estresse Oxidativo , Pentoxifilina/efeitos adversos , Pentoxifilina/uso terapêutico , Placebos/administração & dosagem , Gravidez , Taxa de Gravidez , Gravidez Múltipla , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Vitaminas/administração & dosagem
16.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 99(30): e21315, 2020 Jul 24.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32791721

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: There is evidence that caesarean section (CS) is associated with increased risk of childhood obesity, asthma, and coeliac disease. The gut microbiota of CS-born babies differs to those born vaginally, possibly due to reduced exposure to maternal vaginal bacteria during birth. Vaginal seeding is a currently unproven practice intended to reduce such differences, so that the gut microbiota of CS-born babies is similar to that of babies born vaginally. Our pilot study, which uses oral administration as a novel form of vaginal seeding, will assess the degree of maternal strain transfer and overall efficacy of the procedure for establishing normal gut microbiota development. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Protocol for a single-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled pilot study of a previously untested method of vaginal seeding (oral administration) in 30 CS-born babies. A sample of maternal vaginal bacteria is obtained prior to CS, and mixed with 5 ml sterile water to obtain a supernatant. Healthy babies are randomized at 1:1 to receive active treatment (3 ml supernatant) or placebo (3 ml sterile water). A reference group of 15 non-randomized vaginal-born babies are also being recruited. Babies' stool samples will undergo whole metagenomic shotgun sequencing to identify potential differences in community structure between CS babies receiving active treatment compared to those receiving placebo at age 1 month (primary outcome). Secondary outcomes include differences in overall gut community between CS groups (24 hours, 3 months); similarity of CS-seeded and placebo gut profiles to vaginally-born babies (24 hours, 1 and 3 months); degree of maternal vaginal strain transfer in CS-born babies (24 hours, 1 and 3 months); anthropometry (1 and 3 months) and body composition (3 months). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval by the Northern A Health and Disability Ethics Committee (18/NTA/49). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at international conferences. REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12618000339257).


Assuntos
Cesárea/efeitos adversos , Microbiota/fisiologia , Placebos/administração & dosagem , Vagina/microbiologia , Adulto , Antropometria/métodos , Asma/epidemiologia , Asma/etiologia , Fenômenos Fisiológicos Bacterianos , Composição Corporal , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Doença Celíaca/epidemiologia , Doença Celíaca/etiologia , Parto Obstétrico/tendências , Fezes , Feminino , Humanos , Lactente , Recém-Nascido , Masculino , Metagenômica/métodos , Microbiota/genética , Nova Zelândia/epidemiologia , Obesidade Pediátrica/epidemiologia , Obesidade Pediátrica/etiologia , Gravidez
17.
PLoS One ; 15(8): e0235689, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32760092

RESUMO

Intertrigo is a skin fold dermatitis often requiring recurrent treatment with topical antiseptics or antibiotics, which can select antimicrobial resistance. To minimize this risk, we tested the effectiveness of medical-grade Manuka honey at treating intertrigo as compared to a placebo hydrogel. We additionally characterized the culturable microbial flora of intertrigo and recorded any adverse effect with either treatment. During this randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded, adaptive group-sequential trial, the owners washed the affected sites on their dog with water, dried and applied a thin film of either the honey or the placebo product once daily for 21 days. Cytological and lesional composite scores, owner-assessed pruritus, and microbial cultures were assessed prior to treatment and on Day-22. The fixed effects of time, treatment, and animal-related variables on the pruritus and on each composite score, accounting for random dog effect, were estimated separately with generalized linear mixed models for repeated count outcomes (α = 0.05). The null hypothesis of equal treatment effects was rejected at the first interim analysis. The placebo (n = 16 dogs) outperformed the medical honey (n = 13 dogs) at improving both the cytological score (Treatment×Time = -0.35±0.17; P = 0.04) and clinical score (Treatment×Time = -0.28±0.13; P = 0.04). A microbial burden score higher than 4 increased the severity of the cytological score (dichotomous score: 0.29±0.11; P = 0.01), which in turn increased the severity of the clinical score and pruritus score. For every unit increase in cytological score, the linear predictor of clinical score increased by 0.042±0.019 (P = 0.03), and the one of pruritus score increased by 0.12±0.05 (P = 0.01). However, medical honey outperformed the placebo at alleviating the dog's owner-assessed pruritus after statistically controlling for masking effects (Time = -0.94±0.24; P = 0.002; and Treatment×Time = 0.80±0.36; P = 0.04). Unilateral tests of the least-square mean estimates revealed that honey only significantly improved the pruritus (Hommel-adjusted P = 0.003), while the placebo only improved the cytological and clinical scores (Hommel-adjusted P = 0.01 and 0.002, respectively). Taken together, these results question the value of Manuka honey at treating nasal intertrigo in dogs.


Assuntos
Apiterapia/métodos , Doenças do Cão/terapia , Mel , Intertrigo/veterinária , Prurido/veterinária , Animais , Doenças do Cão/diagnóstico , Doenças do Cão/etiologia , Cães , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Hidrogéis/administração & dosagem , Intertrigo/complicações , Intertrigo/tratamento farmacológico , Masculino , Nariz , Placebos/administração & dosagem , Prurido/diagnóstico , Prurido/tratamento farmacológico , Prurido/etiologia
19.
BMJ ; 370: m1668, 2020 07 20.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32690477

RESUMO

Despite their ubiquitous presence, placebos and placebo effects retain an ambiguous and unsettling presence in biomedicine. Specifically focused on chronic pain, this review examines the effect of placebo treatment under three distinct frameworks: double blind, deception, and open label honestly prescribed. These specific conditions do not necessarily differentially modify placebo outcomes. Psychological, clinical, and neurological theories of placebo effects are scrutinized. In chronic pain, conscious expectation does not reliably predict placebo effects. A supportive patient-physician relationship may enhance placebo effects. This review highlights "predictive coding" and "bayesian brain" as emerging models derived from computational neurobiology that offer a unified framework to explain the heterogeneous evidence on placebos. These models invert the dogma of the brain as a stimulus driven organ to one in which perception relies heavily on learnt, top down, cortical predictions to infer the source of incoming sensory data. In predictive coding/bayesian brain, both chronic pain (significantly modulated by central sensitization) and its alleviation with placebo treatment are explicated as centrally encoded, mostly non-conscious, bayesian biases. The review then evaluates seven ways in which placebos are used in clinical practice and research and their bioethical implications. In this way, it shows that placebo effects are evidence based, clinically relevant, and potentially ethical tools for relieving chronic pain.


Assuntos
Dor Crônica/tratamento farmacológico , Relações Médico-Paciente/ética , Placebos/efeitos adversos , Padrões de Prática Médica/ética , Teorema de Bayes , Dor Crônica/psicologia , Decepção , Método Duplo-Cego , Ética Médica , Humanos , Efeito Placebo , Placebos/administração & dosagem , Padrões de Prática Médica/estatística & dados numéricos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA