Trial of Spesolimab for Generalized Pustular Psoriasis.

BACKGROUND: Generalized pustular psoriasis (GPP) is a rare, life-threatening, inflammatory skin disease characterized by widespread eruption of sterile pustules. Interleukin-36 signaling is involved in the pathogenesis of this disorder. Spesolimab, a humanized anti-interleukin-36 receptor monoclonal antibody, is being studied for the treatment of GPP flares. METHODS: In a phase 2 trial, we randomly assigned patients with a GPP flare in a 2:1 ratio to receive a single 900-mg intravenous dose of spesolimab or placebo. Patients in both groups could receive an open-label dose of spesolimab on day 8, an open-label dose of spesolimab as a rescue medication after day 8, or both and were followed to week 12. The primary end point was a Generalized Pustular Psoriasis Physician Global Assessment (GPPGA) pustulation subscore of 0 (range, 0 [no visible pustules] to 4 [severe pustulation]) at the end of week 1. The key secondary end point was a GPPGA total score of 0 or 1 (clear or almost clear skin) at the end of week 1; scores range from 0 to 4, with higher scores indicating greater disease severity. RESULTS: A total of 53 patients were enrolled: 35 were assigned to receive spesolimab and 18 to receive placebo. At baseline, 46% of the patients in the spesolimab group and 39% of those in the placebo group had a GPPGA pustulation subscore of 3, and 37% and 33%, respectively, had a pustulation subscore of 4. At the end of week 1, a total of 19 of 35 patients (54%) in the spesolimab group had a pustulation subscore of 0, as compared with 1 of 18 patients (6%) in the placebo group (difference, 49 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 21 to 67; P<0.001). A total of 15 of 35 patients (43%) had a GPPGA total score of 0 or 1, as compared with 2 of 18 patients (11%) in the placebo group (difference, 32 percentage points; 95% CI, 2 to 53; P = 0.02). Drug reactions were reported in 2 patients who received spesolimab, in 1 of them concurrently with a drug-induced hepatic injury. Among patients assigned to the spesolimab group, infections occurred in 6 of 35 (17%) through the first week; among patients who received spesolimab at any time in the trial, infections had occurred in 24 of 51 (47%) at week 12. Antidrug antibodies were detected in 23 of 50 patients (46%) who received at least one dose of spesolimab. CONCLUSIONS: In a phase 2 randomized trial involving patients with GPP, the interleukin-36 receptor inhibitor spesolimab resulted in a higher incidence of lesion clearance at 1 week than placebo but was associated with infections and systemic drug reactions. Longer and larger trials are warranted to determine the effect and risks of spesolimab in patients with pustular psoriasis. (Funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; Effisayil 1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03782792.).

Abrocitinib versus Placebo or Dupilumab for Atopic Dermatitis.

BACKGROUND: The oral Janus kinase 1 (JAK1) inhibitor abrocitinib, which reduces interleukin-4 and interleukin-13 signaling, is being investigated for the treatment of atopic dermatitis. Data from trials comparing JAK1 inhibitors with monoclonal antibodies, such as dupilumab, that block interleukin-4 receptors are limited. METHODS: In a phase 3, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned patients with atopic dermatitis that was unresponsive to topical agents or that warranted systemic therapy (in a 2:2:2:1 ratio) to receive 200 mg or 100 mg of abrocitinib orally once daily, 300 mg of dupilumab subcutaneously every other week (after a loading dose of 600 mg), or placebo; all the patients received topical therapy. The primary end points were an Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) response (defined as a score of 0 [clear] or 1 [almost clear] on the IGA [scores range from 0 to 4], with an improvement of ≥2 points from baseline) and an Eczema Area and Severity Index-75 (EASI-75) response (defined as ≥75% improvement from baseline in the score on the EASI [scores range from 0 to 72]) at week 12. The key secondary end points were itch response (defined as an improvement of ≥4 points in the score on the Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale [scores range from 0 to 10]) at week 2 and IGA and EASI-75 responses at week 16. RESULTS: A total of 838 patients underwent randomization; 226 patients were assigned to the 200-mg abrocitinib group, 238 to the 100-mg abrocitinib group, 243 to the dupilumab group, and 131 to the placebo group. An IGA response at week 12 was observed in 48.4% of patients in the 200-mg abrocitinib group, 36.6% in the 100-mg abrocitinib group, 36.5% in the dupilumab group, and 14.0% in the placebo group (P<0.001 for both abrocitinib doses vs. placebo); an EASI-75 response at week 12 was observed in 70.3%, 58.7%, 58.1%, and 27.1%, respectively (P<0.001 for both abrocitinib doses vs. placebo). The 200-mg dose, but not the 100-mg dose, of abrocitinib was superior to dupilumab with respect to itch response at week 2. Neither abrocitinib dose differed significantly from dupilumab with respect to most other key secondary end-point comparisons at week 16. Nausea occurred in 11.1% of the patients in the 200-mg abrocitinib group and 4.2% of those in the 100-mg abrocitinib group, and acne occurred in 6.6% and 2.9%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, abrocitinib at a dose of either 200 mg or 100 mg once daily resulted in significantly greater reductions in signs and symptoms of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis than placebo at weeks 12 and 16. The 200-mg dose, but not the 100-mg dose, of abrocitinib was superior to dupilumab with respect to itch response at week 2. Neither abrocitinib dose differed significantly from dupilumab with respect to most other key secondary end-point comparisons at week 16. (Funded by Pfizer; JADE COMPARE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03720470.).

Adjuvant Nivolumab versus Placebo in Muscle-Invasive Urothelial Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The role of adjuvant treatment in high-risk muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma after radical surgery is not clear. METHODS: In a phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial, we assigned patients with muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma who had undergone radical surgery to receive, in a 1:1 ratio, either nivolumab (240 mg intravenously) or placebo every 2 weeks for up to 1 year. Neoadjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy before trial entry was allowed. The primary end points were disease-free survival among all the patients (intention-to-treat population) and among patients with a tumor programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression level of 1% or more. Survival free from recurrence outside the urothelial tract was a secondary end point. RESULTS: A total of 353 patients were assigned to receive nivolumab and 356 to receive placebo. The median disease-free survival in the intention-to-treat population was 20.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 16.5 to 27.6) with nivolumab and 10.8 months (95% CI, 8.3 to 13.9) with placebo. The percentage of patients who were alive and disease-free at 6 months was 74.9% with nivolumab and 60.3% with placebo (hazard ratio for disease recurrence or death, 0.70; 98.22% CI, 0.55 to 0.90; P<0.001). Among patients with a PD-L1 expression level of 1% or more, the percentage of patients was 74.5% and 55.7%, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.55; 98.72% CI, 0.35 to 0.85; P<0.001). The median survival free from recurrence outside the urothelial tract in the intention-to-treat population was 22.9 months (95% CI, 19.2 to 33.4) with nivolumab and 13.7 months (95% CI, 8.4 to 20.3) with placebo. The percentage of patients who were alive and free from recurrence outside the urothelial tract at 6 months was 77.0% with nivolumab and 62.7% with placebo (hazard ratio for recurrence outside the urothelial tract or death, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.89). Among patients with a PD-L1 expression level of 1% or more, the percentage of patients was 75.3% and 56.7%, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.79). Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 17.9% of the nivolumab group and 7.2% of the placebo group. Two treatment-related deaths due to pneumonitis were noted in the nivolumab group. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial involving patients with high-risk muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma who had undergone radical surgery, disease-free survival was longer with adjuvant nivolumab than with placebo in the intention-to-treat population and among patients with a PD-L1 expression level of 1% or more. (Funded by Bristol Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical; CheckMate 274 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02632409.).

Comparative effectiveness of different placebos and comparator groups for hand osteoarthritis exploring the impact of contextual factors: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the pain relief effects of comparators (placebos and untreated control groups) in hand osteoarthritis trials and the impact of contextual factors. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE and CENTRAL from inception to December 26, 2021. We included randomised controlled trials of people with hand osteoarthritis with a placebo or an untreated control group. We assessed the Risk of Bias with Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool version 2. Each comparator was contrasted with a null-arm, imputed as having a zero change from baseline with the same standard deviation as the comparator. We combined the standardised mean differences with a random effects meta-analysis. The contextual factors' effect was explored in meta-regression and stratified models with pain as the dependent variable. RESULTS: 84 trials (7262 participants) were eligible for quantitative synthesis, of which 76 (6462 participants) were eligible for the stratified analyses. Placebos were superior to their matched null-arms in relieving pain with an effect size of -0.51 (95% confidence interval -0.61 to -0.42), while untreated control groups were not. When analysing all comparators, blinded trial designs and low risk of bias were associated with higher pain relief compared to an open-label trial design and some concern or high risk of bias. CONCLUSION: The placebo response on pain for people with hand osteoarthritis was increased by appropriate blinding and a lower risk of bias assessment. Placebos were superior to a null-arm, while untreated control groups were not. Results emphasise the importance of using appropriate comparators in clinical trials. PROSPERO REGISTRATION ID: CRD42022298984.

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for pain control in women with primary dysmenorrhoea.

BACKGROUND: Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a non-pharmacological treatment that works by delivering electrical currents via electrodes attached to the skin at the site of pain. It can be an alternative to pharmacological treatments. The mechanism of action of TENS for pain relief is related to the inhibition of the transmission of painful stimuli, release of endogenous opioids, and reduced muscle ischaemia of the uterus. Although it has been used for primary dysmenorrhoea ((PD); period pain or menstrual cramps), evidence of the efficacy and safety of high-frequency TENS, low-frequency TENS, or other treatments for PD is limited. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) in comparison with placebo, no treatment, and other treatments for primary dysmenorrhoea (PD). SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Gynaecology and Fertility Group's Specialized Register of controlled trials, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, AMED, CINAHL, and the Korean and Chinese language databases up to 9 April 2024. We also searched for ongoing trials in trials registries and the reference lists of relevant studies for additional trials. Language restrictions were not applied. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included women (aged 12 to 49 years) with PD. Included trials compared low-frequency TENS or high-frequency TENS with other TENS, placebo, or other treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Four review authors screened the trials, extracted the data according to the protocol, assessed the risk of bias using RoB 2, and assessed the certainty of evidence for all review comparisons and primary outcomes (i.e. pain relief and adverse effects) using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: This review replaces the current review, published in 2009. We included 20 RCTs involving 585 randomized women with high-frequency TENS, low-frequency TENS, placebo or no treatment, or other treatment. We included five comparisons: high-frequency TENS versus placebo or no treatment, low-frequency TENS versus placebo or no treatment, high-frequency TENS versus low-frequency TENS, high-frequency TENS versus other treatments, and low-frequency TENS versus other treatments. High-frequency TENS versus placebo or no treatment High-frequency TENS may reduce pain compared with placebo or no treatment (mean difference (MD) -1.39, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.51 to -0.28; 10 RCTs, 345 women; low-certainty evidence; I2 = 88%). Two out of three RCTs reported no adverse effects and hence we were unable to estimate the effect of high-frequency TENS on adverse effects. Low-frequency TENS versus placebo or no treatment Low-frequency TENS may reduce pain compared with placebo or no treatment (MD -2.04, 95% CI -2.95 to -1.14; 3 RCTs, 645 women; low-certainty evidence; I2 = 0%). No trials reported adverse effects for this comparison. High-frequency TENS versus low-frequency TENS It is uncertain whether high-frequency TENS had an effect on pain relief compared with low-frequency TENS (MD 0.89, 95% CI -0.19 to 1.96; 3 RCTs, 54 women; low-certainty evidence; I2 = 0%). One trial contributed data on adverse effects but no adverse events occurred. High-frequency TENS versus other treatments It is uncertain whether high-frequency TENS had an effect on pain relief compared to acupressure (MD -0.66, 95% CI -1.72 to 0.40; 1 RCT, 18 women; very low-certainty evidence), acetaminophen (paracetamol) (MD -0.98, 95% CI -3.30 to 1.34; 1 RCT, 20 women; very low-certainty evidence), and interferential current therapy (MD -0.03, 95% CI -1.04 to 0.98; 2 RCTs, 62 women; low-certainty evidence; I2 = 0%). The occurrence of adverse effects may not differ significantly between high-frequency TENS and NSAIDs (OR 12.06, 95% CI 0.26 to 570.62; 2 RCTs, 88 women; low-certainty evidence; I2 = 78%). Low-frequency TENS versus other treatments It is uncertain whether low-frequency TENS had an effect on pain relief compared with acetaminophen (MD -1.48, 95% CI -3.61 to 0.65; 1 RCT, 20 women; very low-certainty evidence). No trials reported adverse effects for this comparison. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: High-frequency TENS and low-frequency TENS may reduce pain compared with placebo or no treatment. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence because of the risk of bias. Future RCTs should focus more on secondary outcomes of this review (e.g. requirement for additional analgesics, limitation of daily activities, or health-related quality of life) and should be designed to ensure a low risk of bias.

Antibiotics for treatment of leptospirosis.

BACKGROUND: Leptospirosis is a disease transmitted from animals to humans through water, soil, or food contaminated with the urine of infected animals, caused by pathogenic Leptospira species. Antibiotics are commonly prescribed for the management of leptospirosis. Despite the widespread use of antibiotic treatment for leptospirosis, there seems to be insufficient evidence to determine its effectiveness or to recommend antibiotic use as a standard practice. This updated systematic review evaluated the available evidence regarding the use of antibiotics in treating leptospirosis, building upon a previously published Cochrane review. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of antibiotics versus placebo, no intervention, or another antibiotic for the treatment of people with leptospirosis. SEARCH METHODS: We identified randomised clinical trials following standard Cochrane procedures. The date of the last search was 27 March 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: We searched for randomised clinical trials of various designs that examined the use of antibiotics for treating leptospirosis. We did not impose any restrictions based on the age, sex, occupation, or comorbidities of the participants involved in the trials. Our search encompassed trials that evaluated antibiotics, regardless of the method of administration, dosage, and schedule, and compared them with placebo or no intervention, or compared different antibiotics. We included trials regardless of the outcomes reported. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: During the preparation of this review, we adhered to the Cochrane methodology and used Review Manager. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and serious adverse events (nosocomial infection). Our secondary outcomes were quality of life, proportion of people with adverse events considered non-serious, and days of hospitalisation. To assess the risk of bias of the included trials, we used the RoB 2 tool, and for evaluating the certainty of evidence we used GRADEpro GDT software. We presented dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) and continuous outcomes as mean differences (MD), both accompanied by their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used the random-effects model for all our main analyses and the fixed-effect model for sensitivity analyses. For our primary outcome analyses, we included trial data from the longest follow-up period. MAIN RESULTS: We identified nine randomised clinical trials comprising 1019 participants. Seven trials compared two intervention groups and two trials compared three intervention groups. Amongst the trials comparing antibiotics versus placebos, four trials assessed penicillin and one trial assessed doxycycline. In the trials comparing different antibiotics, one trial evaluated doxycycline versus azithromycin, one trial assessed penicillin versus doxycycline versus cefotaxime, and one trial evaluated ceftriaxone versus penicillin. One trial assessed penicillin with chloramphenicol and no intervention. Apart from two trials that recruited military personnel stationed in endemic areas or military personnel returning from training courses in endemic areas, the remaining trials recruited people from the general population presenting to the hospital with fever in an endemic area. The participants' ages in the included trials was 13 to 92 years. The treatment duration was seven days for penicillin, doxycycline, and cephalosporins; five days for chloramphenicol; and three days for azithromycin. The follow-up durations varied across trials, with three trials not specifying their follow-up periods. Three trials were excluded from quantitative synthesis; one reported zero events for a prespecified outcome, and two did not provide data for any prespecified outcomes. Antibiotics versus placebo or no intervention The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin versus placebo on all-cause mortality (RR 1.57, 95% CI 0.65 to 3.79; I2 = 8%; 3 trials, 367 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin or chloramphenicol versus placebo on adverse events considered non-serious (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.35 to 3.17; I2 = 0%; 2 trials, 162 participants; very low-certainty evidence). None of the included trials assessed serious adverse events. Antibiotics versus another antibiotic The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin versus cephalosporin on all-cause mortality (RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.47 to 4.04; I2 = 0%; 2 trials, 348 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or versus doxycycline (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.13 to 6.46; 1 trial, 168 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of cefotaxime versus doxycycline on all-cause mortality (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.01 to 3.78; 1 trial, 169 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin versus doxycycline on serious adverse events (nosocomial infection) (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.11 to 3.62; 1 trial, 168 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or versus cefotaxime (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.15 to 7.02; 1 trial, 175 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of doxycycline versus cefotaxime on serious adverse events (nosocomial infection) (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.15 to 7.02; 1 trial, 175 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin versus cefotaxime (RR 3.03, 95% CI 0.13 to 73.47; 1 trial, 175 participants; very low-certainty evidence), versus doxycycline (RR 2.80, 95% CI 0.12 to 67.66; 1 trial, 175 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or versus chloramphenicol on adverse events considered non-serious (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.15 to 3.67; 1 trial, 52 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Funding Six of the nine trials included statements disclosing their funding/supporting sources and three trials did not mention funding source. Four of the six trials mentioning sources received funds from public or governmental sources or from international charitable sources, and the remaining two, in addition to public or governmental sources, received support in the form of trial drug supply directly from pharmaceutical companies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: As the certainty of evidence is very low, we do not know if antibiotics provide little to no effect on all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, or adverse events considered non-serious. There is a lack of definitive rigorous data from randomised trials to support the use of antibiotics for treating leptospirosis infection, and the absence of trials reporting data on clinically relevant outcomes further adds to this limitation.

Early pharmacological interventions for prevention of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in individuals experiencing acute traumatic stress symptoms.

BACKGROUND: Acute traumatic stress symptoms may develop in people who have been exposed to a traumatic event. Although they are usually self-limiting in time, some people develop post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), a severe and debilitating condition. Pharmacological interventions have been proposed for acute symptoms to act as an indicated prevention measure for PTSD development. As many individuals will spontaneously remit, these interventions should balance efficacy and tolerability. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and acceptability of early pharmacological interventions for prevention of PTSD in adults experiencing acute traumatic stress symptoms. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Controlled Trial Register (CCMDCTR), CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and two other databases. We checked the reference lists of all included studies and relevant systematic reviews. The search was last updated on 23 January 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials on adults exposed to any kind of traumatic event and presenting acute traumatic stress symptoms, without restriction on their severity. We considered comparisons of any medication with placebo, or with another medication. We excluded trials that investigated medications as an augmentation to psychotherapy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. Using a random-effects model, we analysed dichotomous data as risk ratios (RR) and calculated the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial/harmful outcome (NNTB/NNTH). We analysed continuous data as mean differences (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMD). Our primary outcomes were PTSD severity and dropouts due to adverse events. Secondary outcomes included PTSD rate, functional disability and quality of life. MAIN RESULTS: We included eight studies that considered four interventions (escitalopram, hydrocortisone, intranasal oxytocin, temazepam) and involved a total of 779 participants. The largest trial contributed 353 participants and the next largest, 120 and 118 participants respectively. The trials enrolled participants admitted to trauma centres or emergency departments. The risk of bias in the included studies was generally low except for attrition rate, which we rated as high-risk. We could meta-analyse data for two comparisons: escitalopram versus placebo (but limited to secondary outcomes) and hydrocortisone versus placebo. One study compared escitalopram to placebo at our primary time point of three months after the traumatic event. There was inconclusive evidence of any difference in terms of PTSD severity (mean difference (MD) on the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS, score range 0 to 136) -11.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) -24.56 to 1.86; 1 study, 23 participants; very low-certainty evidence), dropouts due to adverse events (no participant left the study early due to adverse events; 1 study, 31 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and PTSD rates (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.03 to 13.08; NNTB 37, 95% CI NNTB 15 to NNTH 1; 1 study, 23 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The study did not assess functional disability or quality of life. Three studies compared hydrocortisone to placebo at our primary time point of three months after the traumatic event. We found inconclusive evidence on whether hydrocortisone was more effective in reducing the severity of PTSD symptoms compared to placebo (MD on CAPS -7.53, 95% CI -25.20 to 10.13; I2 = 85%; 3 studies, 136 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and whether it reduced the risk of developing PTSD (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.38; NNTB 14, 95% CI NNTB 8 to NNTH 5; I2 = 36%; 3 studies, 136 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Evidence on the risk of dropping out due to adverse events is inconclusive (RR 3.19, 95% CI 0.13 to 75.43; 2 studies, 182 participants; low-certainty evidence) and it is unclear whether hydrocortisone might improve quality of life (MD on the SF-36 (score range 0 to 136, higher is better) 19.70, 95% CI -1.10 to 40.50; 1 study, 43 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No study assessed functional disability. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review provides uncertain evidence regarding the use of escitalopram, hydrocortisone, intranasal oxytocin and temazepam for people with acute stress symptoms. It is therefore unclear whether these pharmacological interventions exert a positive or negative effect in this population. It is important to note that acute traumatic stress symptoms are often limited in time, and that the lack of data prevents the careful assessment of expected benefits against side effects that is therefore required. To yield stronger conclusions regarding both positive and negative outcomes, larger sample sizes are required. A common operational framework of criteria for inclusion and baseline assessment might help in better understanding who, if anyone, benefits from an intervention. As symptom severity alone does not provide the full picture of the impact of exposure to trauma, assessment of quality of life and functional impairment would provide a more comprehensive picture of the effects of the interventions. The assessment and reporting of side effects may facilitate a more comprehensive understanding of tolerability.

Immunosuppressive therapy for IgA nephropathy in children.

BACKGROUND: IgA nephropathy (IgAN) is the most common cause of primary glomerulonephritis. It is a heterogeneous disease with different presentations and high morbidity. Thirty per cent of adults and 20% of children (followed into adulthood) will have a 50% decline in kidney function or develop kidney failure after 10 years. OBJECTIVES: To determine the benefits and harms of immunosuppressive therapy for the treatment of IgAN in children. SEARCH METHODS: We contacted the Information Specialist and searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 03 October 2023 using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSIs) investigating the treatment of IgAN in children with immunosuppressive therapies compared to placebo, no treatment, supportive care, standard therapy (Japanese protocol), other immunosuppressive therapies or non-immunosuppressive therapies. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. Random effects meta-analyses were used to summarise estimates of treatment effects. Treatment effects were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes, and the mean difference (MD) and 95% CI for continuous outcomes. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for RCTs and the ROBIN-I tool for NRSIs. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE). MAIN RESULTS: This review included 13 studies with 686 participants. Ten RCTs included 334 children and 191 adults, and three NRSIs included 151 participants, all children. Most participants had mild kidney disease. The risk of bias was unclear for most of the domains relating to allocation concealment, blinding of participants, personnel, and outcome assessment. In children with IgAN, it is uncertain if corticosteroid (steroid) therapy, compared to placebo reduces proteinuria (1 study, 64 children and young adults: RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.72; low certainty evidence) or the decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (1 study, 64 children and young adults: RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.39; low certainty evidence). It is uncertain if steroids reduce proteinuria compared to supportive care (2 studies, 61 children: RR 0.04, 95% CI -0.83 to 0.72; low certainty evidence). Adverse events associated with steroid therapy were not assessed due to heterogeneity in steroid protocols, including dose and duration, and lack of systematic assessment for adverse events in the included studies. Azathioprine, mycophenolate mofetil, mizoribine, or cyclophosphamide alone or in combination with steroid therapy had uncertain effects on improving proteinuria or preventing eGFR decline in children with IgAN. Fish oil, vitamin E and tonsillectomy had uncertain effects on improving proteinuria or preventing eGFR decline. Effects of other immunosuppressive therapies, secondary outcomes and adverse events were not assessed due to insufficient data. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of high-quality evidence to guide the management of IgAN in children. There is no evidence to indicate that steroids, other immunosuppressive therapies, or tonsillectomy, when added to optimal supportive care, prevent a decline in eGFR or proteinuria in children with IgAN. Available studies were few, with small numbers, low-quality evidence, high or uncertain risk of bias, did not systematically assess harms associated with treatment, or report net benefits or harms. Severe cases and atypical presentations of IgAN were not included in the reviewed studies, and our findings cannot be generalised to these situations.

Intravenous immunoglobulin for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy.

BACKGROUND: Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) causes progressive or relapsing weakness and numbness of the limbs, which lasts for at least two months. Uncontrolled studies have suggested that intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) could help to reduce symptoms. This is an update of a review first published in 2002 and last updated in 2013. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of intravenous immunoglobulin in people with chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two trials registers on 8 March 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that tested any dose of IVIg versus placebo, plasma exchange, or corticosteroids in people with definite or probable CIDP. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcome was significant improvement in disability within six weeks after the start of treatment, as determined and defined by the study authors. Our secondary outcomes were change in mean disability score within six weeks, change in muscle strength (Medical Research Council (MRC) sum score) within six weeks, change in mean disability score at 24 weeks or later, frequency of serious adverse events, and frequency of any adverse events. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for our main outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: We included nine RCTs with 372 participants (235 male) from Europe, North America, South America, and Israel. There was low statistical heterogeneity between the trial results, and the overall risk of bias was low for all trials that contributed data to the analysis. Five trials (235 participants) compared IVIg with placebo, one trial (20 participants) compared IVIg with plasma exchange, two trials (72 participants) compared IVIg with prednisolone, and one trial (45 participants) compared IVIg with intravenous methylprednisolone (IVMP). We included one new trial in this update, though it contributed no data to any meta-analyses. IVIg compared with placebo increases the probability of significant improvement in disability within six weeks of the start of treatment (risk ratio (RR) 2.40, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.72 to 3.36; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 4, 95% CI 3 to 5; 5 trials, 269 participants; high-certainty evidence). Since each trial used a different disability scale and definition of significant improvement, we were unable to evaluate the clinical relevance of the pooled effect. IVIg compared with placebo improves disability measured on the Rankin scale (0 to 6, lower is better) two to six weeks after the start of treatment (mean difference (MD) -0.26 points, 95% CI -0.48 to -0.05; 3 trials, 90 participants; high-certainty evidence). IVIg compared with placebo probably improves disability measured on the Inflammatory Neuropathy Cause and Treatment (INCAT) scale (1 to 10, lower is better) after 24 weeks (MD 0.80 points, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.37; 1 trial, 117 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference between IVIg and placebo in the frequency of serious adverse events (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.87; 3 trials, 315 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The trial comparing IVIg with plasma exchange reported none of our main outcomes. IVIg compared with prednisolone probably has little or no effect on the probability of significant improvement in disability four weeks after the start of treatment (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.68; 1 trial, 29 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and little or no effect on change in mean disability measured on the Rankin scale (MD 0.21 points, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.61; 1 trial, 24 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference between IVIg and prednisolone in the frequency of serious adverse events (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.04 to 4.69; 1 cross-over trial, 32 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). IVIg compared with IVMP probably increases the likelihood of significant improvement in disability two weeks after starting treatment (RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.40 to 5.38; 1 trial, 45 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). IVIg compared with IVMP probably has little or no effect on change in disability measured on the Rankin scale two weeks after the start of treatment (MD 0.24 points, 95% CI -0.15 to 0.63; 1 trial, 45 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) or on change in mean disability measured with the Overall Neuropathy Limitation Scale (ONLS, 1 to 12, lower is better) 24 weeks after the start of treatment (MD 0.03 points, 95% CI -0.91 to 0.97; 1 trial, 45 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The frequency of serious adverse events may be higher with IVIg compared with IVMP (RR 4.40, 95% CI 0.22 to 86.78; 1 trial, 45 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Evidence from RCTs shows that IVIg improves disability for at least two to six weeks compared with placebo, with an NNTB of 4. During this period, IVIg probably has similar efficacy to oral prednisolone and IVMP. Further placebo-controlled trials are unlikely to change these conclusions. In one large trial, the benefit of IVIg compared with placebo in terms of improved disability score persisted for 24 weeks. Further research is needed to assess the long-term benefits and harms of IVIg relative to other treatments.

Antioxidant supplementation for sickle cell disease.

BACKGROUND: Sickle cell disease (SCD) refers to a group of genetic disorders characterized by the presence of an abnormal haemoglobin molecule called haemoglobin S (HbS). When subjected to oxidative stress from low oxygen concentrations, HbS molecules form rigid polymers, giving the red cell the typical sickle shape. Antioxidants have been shown to reduce oxidative stress and improve outcomes in other diseases associated with oxidative stress. Therefore, it is important to review and synthesize the available evidence on the effect of antioxidants on the clinical outcomes of people with SCD. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of antioxidant supplementation for improving health outcomes in people with SCD. SEARCH METHODS: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 15 August 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials comparing antioxidant supplementation to placebo, other antioxidants, or different doses of antioxidants, in people with SCD. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted data, assessed the risk of bias and certainty of the evidence, and reported according to Cochrane methodological procedures. MAIN RESULTS: The review included 1609 participants in 26 studies, with 17 comparisons. We rated 13 studies as having a high risk of bias overall, and 13 studies as having an unclear risk of bias overall due to study limitations. We used GRADE to rate the certainty of evidence. Only eight studies reported on our important outcomes at six months. Vitamin C (1400 mg) plus vitamin E (800 mg) versus placebo Based on evidence from one study in 83 participants, vitamin C (1400 mg) plus vitamin E (800 mg) may not be better than placebo at reducing the frequency of crisis (risk ratio (RR) 1.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64 to 2.18), the severity of pain (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.40 to 4.37), or adverse effects (AE), of which the most common were headache, nausea, fatigue, diarrhoea, and epigastric pain (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.00). Vitamin C plus vitamin E may increase the risk of SCD-related complications (acute chest syndrome: RR 2.66, 95% CI 0.77 to 9.13; 1 study, 83 participants), and increase haemoglobin level (median (interquartile range) 90 (81 to 96) g/L versus 93.5 (84 to 105) g/L) (1 study, 83 participants) compared to placebo. However, the evidence for all the above effects is very uncertain. The study did not report on quality of life (QoL) of participants and their caregivers, nor on frequency of hospitalization. Zinc versus placebo Zinc may not be better than placebo at reducing the frequency of crisis at six months (rate ratio 0.62, 95% CI 0.17 to 2.29; 1 study, 36 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether zinc is better than placebo at improving sickle cell-related complications (complete healing of leg ulcers at six months: RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.60 to 6.72; 1 study, 34 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Zinc may be better than placebo at increasing haemoglobin level (g/dL) (MD 1.26, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.26; 1 study, 36 participants; low-certainty evidence). The study did not report on severity of pain, QoL, AE, and frequency of hospitalization. N-acetylcysteine versus placebo N-acetylcysteine (NAC) 1200 mg may not be better than placebo at reducing the frequency of crisis in SCD, reported as pain days (rate ratio 0.99 days, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.84; 1 study, 96 participants; low-certainty evidence). Low-certainty evidence from one study (96 participants) suggests NAC (1200 mg) may not be better than placebo at reducing the severity of pain (MD 0.17, 95% CI -0.53 to 0.87). Compared to placebo, NAC (1200 mg) may not be better at improving physical QoL (MD -1.80, 95% CI -5.01 to 1.41) and mental QoL (MD 2.00, 95% CI -1.45 to 5.45; very low-certainty evidence), reducing the risk of adverse effects (gastrointestinal complaints, pruritus, or rash) (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.14; low-certainty evidence), reducing the frequency of hospitalizations (rate ratio 0.98, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.38; low-certainty evidence), and sickle cell-related complications (RR 5.00, 95% CI 0.25 to 101.48; very low-certainty evidence), or increasing haemoglobin level (MD -0.18 g/dL, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.04; low-certainty evidence). L-arginine versus placebo L-arginine may not be better than placebo at reducing the frequency of crisis (monthly pain) (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.95; 1 study, 50 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, L-arginine may be better than placebo at reducing the severity of pain (MD -1.41, 95% CI -1.65 to -1.18; 2 studies, 125 participants; low-certainty evidence). One participant allocated to L-arginine developed hives during infusion of L-arginine, another experienced acute clinical deterioration, and a participant in the placebo group had clinically relevant increases in liver function enzymes. The evidence is very uncertain whether L-arginine is better at reducing the mean number of days in hospital compared to placebo (MD -0.85 days, 95% CI -1.87 to 0.17; 2 studies, 125 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Also, L-arginine may not be better than placebo at increasing haemoglobin level (MD 0.4 g/dL, 95% CI -0.50 to 1.3; 2 studies, 106 participants; low-certainty evidence). No study in this comparison reported on QoL and sickle cell-related complications. Omega-3 versus placebo Very low-certainty evidence shows no evidence of a difference in the risk of adverse effects of omega-3 compared to placebo (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.48; 1 study, 67 participants). Very low-certainty evidence suggests that omega-3 may not be better than placebo at increasing haemoglobin level (MD 0.36 g/L, 95% CI -0.21 to 0.93; 1 study, 67 participants). The study did not report on frequency of crisis, severity of pain, QoL, frequency of hospitalization, and sickle cell-related complications. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There was inconsistent evidence on all outcomes to draw conclusions on the beneficial and harmful effects of antioxidants. However, L-arginine may be better than placebo at reducing the severity of pain at six months, and zinc may be better than placebo at increasing haemoglobin level. We are uncertain whether other antioxidants are beneficial for SCD. Larger studies conducted on each comparison would reduce the current uncertainties.

Psychedelic-assisted therapy for treating anxiety, depression, and existential distress in people with life-threatening diseases.

BACKGROUND: Psychedelic-assisted therapy refers to a group of therapeutic practices involving psychedelics taken under therapeutic supervision from physicians, psychologists, and others. It has been hypothesised that psychedelic-assisted therapy may reduce symptoms of anxiety, depression, and existential distress in patients facing life-threatening diseases (e.g. cancer). However, these substances are illegal in most countries and have been associated with potential risks. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of psychedelic-assisted therapy compared to placebo or active comparators (e.g. antidepressants) for treatment of anxiety, depression, and existential distress in people with life-threatening diseases. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two trial registers on 30 March 2024. In addition, we undertook reference checking, citation searching, and contact with study authors to identify additional studies. We used no language or date restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), with no restrictions regarding comorbidity, sex, or ethnicity. Interventions comprised a substance-induced psychedelic experience preceded by preparatory therapeutic sessions and followed by integrative therapeutic sessions. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS: We included six studies in the review, which evaluated two different interventions: psychedelic-assisted therapy with classical psychedelics (psilocybin ('magic mushrooms') and lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD)), and psychedelic-assisted therapy with 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA or 'Ecstasy'). The studies randomised 149 participants with life-threatening diseases and analysed data for 140 of them. The age range of participants was 36 to 64 years. The studies lasted between 6 and 12 months, and were conducted in outpatient settings in the USA and in Switzerland. Drug companies were not involved in study funding, but funding was provided by organisations that promote psychedelic-assisted therapy. Primary outcomes (at 1 to 12 weeks) Anxiety Psychedelic-assisted therapy using classical psychedelics (psilocybin, LSD) may result in a reduction in anxiety when compared to active placebo (or low-dose psychedelic): State Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-Trait, scale 20 to 80) mean difference (MD) -8.41, 95% CI -12.92 to -3.89; STAI-State (scale 20 to 80) MD -9.04, 95% CI -13.87 to -4.21; 5 studies, 122 participants; low-certainty evidence. The effect of psychedelic-assisted therapy using MDMA on anxiety, compared to placebo, is very uncertain: STAI-T MD -14.70, 95% CI -29.45 to 0.05; STAI-S MD -16.10, 95% CI -33.03 to 0.83; 1 study, 18 participants; very low certainty evidence. Depression Psychedelic-assisted therapy using classical psychedelics (psilocybin, LSD) may result in a reduction in depression when compared to active placebo (or low-dose psychedelic): Beck Depression Inventory (BDI, scale 0 to 63) MD -4.92, 95% CI -8.97 to -0.87; 4 studies, 112 participants; standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.43, 95% CI -0.79 to -0.06; 5 studies, 122 participants; low-certainty evidence. The effect of psychedelic-assisted therapy using MDMA on depression, compared to placebo, is very uncertain: BDI-II (scale: 0 to 63) MD -6.30, 95% CI -16.93 to 4.33; 1 study, 18 participants; very low certainty evidence. Existential distress Psychedelic-assisted therapy using classical psychedelics (psilocybin, LSD) compared to active placebo (or low-dose psychedelic) may result in a reduction in demoralisation, one of the most common measures of existential distress, but the evidence is very uncertain (Demoralisation Scale, 1 study, 28 participants): post treatment scores, placebo group 39.6 (SEM 3.4), psilocybin group 18.8 (3.6), P ≤ 0.01). Evidence from other measures of existential distress was mixed. Existential distress was not measured in people receiving psychedelic-assisted therapy with MDMA. Secondary outcomes (at 1 to 12 weeks) Quality of life When classical psychedelics were used, one study had inconclusive results and two reported improved quality of life, but the evidence is very uncertain. MDMA did not improve quality of life measures, but the evidence is also very uncertain. Spirituality Participants receiving psychedelic-assisted therapy with classical psychedelics rated their experience as being spiritually significant (2 studies), but the evidence is very uncertain. Spirituality was not assessed in participants receiving MDMA. Adverse events No treatment-related serious adverse events or adverse events grade 3/4 were reported. Common minor to moderate adverse events for classical psychedelics were elevated blood pressure, nausea, anxiety, emotional distress, and psychotic-like symptoms (e.g. pseudo-hallucination where the participant is aware they are hallucinating); for MDMA, common minor to moderate adverse events were anxiety, dry mouth, jaw clenching, and headaches. Symptoms subsided when drug effects wore off or up to one week later. Certainty of the evidence Although all six studies had intended to blind participants, personnel, and assessors, blinding could not be achieved as this is very difficult in studies investigating psychedelics. Using GRADE criteria, we judged the certainty of evidence to be low to very low, mainly due to high risk of bias and imprecision (small sample size). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Implications for practice Psychedelic-assisted therapy with classical psychedelics (psilocybin, LSD) may be effective for treating anxiety, depression, and possibly existential distress, in people facing a life-threatening disease. Psychedelic-assisted therapy seemed to be well tolerated, with no treatment-emergent serious adverse events reported in the studies included in this review. However, the certainty of evidence is low to very low, which means that we cannot be sure about these results, and they might be changed by future research. At the time of this review (2024), psychedelic drugs are illegal in many countries. Implications for research The risk of bias due to 'unblinding' (participants being aware of which intervention they are receiving) could be reduced by measuring expectation bias, checking blinding has been maintained before cross-over, and using active placebos. More studies with larger sample sizes are needed to reduce imprecision. As the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) currently classifies psychedelics as Schedule I substances (i.e. having no accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse), research involving these drugs is restricted, but is steadily increasing.

Cardiovascular Outcomes with Ertugliflozin in Type 2 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: The cardiovascular effects of ertugliflozin, an inhibitor of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2, have not been established. METHODS: In a multicenter, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned patients with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease to receive 5 mg or 15 mg of ertugliflozin or placebo once daily. With the data from the two ertugliflozin dose groups pooled for analysis, the primary objective was to show the noninferiority of ertugliflozin to placebo with respect to the primary outcome, major adverse cardiovascular events (a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke). The noninferiority margin was 1.3 (upper boundary of a 95.6% confidence interval for the hazard ratio [ertugliflozin vs. placebo] for major adverse cardiovascular events). The first key secondary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes or hospitalization for heart failure. RESULTS: A total of 8246 patients underwent randomization and were followed for a mean of 3.5 years. Among 8238 patients who received at least one dose of ertugliflozin or placebo, a major adverse cardiovascular event occurred in 653 of 5493 patients (11.9%) in the ertugliflozin group and in 327 of 2745 patients (11.9%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95.6% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.11; P<0.001 for noninferiority). Death from cardiovascular causes or hospitalization for heart failure occurred in 444 of 5499 patients (8.1%) in the ertugliflozin group and in 250 of 2747 patients (9.1%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95.8% CI, 0.75 to 1.03; P = 0.11 for superiority). The hazard ratio for death from cardiovascular causes was 0.92 (95.8% CI, 0.77 to 1.11), and the hazard ratio for death from renal causes, renal replacement therapy, or doubling of the serum creatinine level was 0.81 (95.8% CI, 0.63 to 1.04). Amputations were performed in 54 patients (2.0%) who received the 5-mg dose of ertugliflozin and in 57 patients (2.1%) who received the 15-mg dose, as compared with 45 patients (1.6%) who received placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, ertugliflozin was noninferior to placebo with respect to major adverse cardiovascular events. (Funded by Merck Sharp & Dohme and Pfizer; VERTIS CV ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01986881.).

Randomized Trial of Amoxicillin for Pneumonia in Pakistan.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends oral amoxicillin for patients who have pneumonia with tachypnea, yet trial data indicate that not using amoxicillin to treat this condition may be noninferior to using amoxicillin. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled noninferiority trial involving children at primary health care centers in low-income communities in Karachi, Pakistan. Children who were 2 to 59 months of age and who met WHO criteria for nonsevere pneumonia with tachypnea were randomly assigned to a 3-day course of a suspension of amoxicillin (the active control) of 50 mg per milliliter or matched volume of placebo (the test regimen), according to WHO weight bands (500 mg every 12 hours for a weight of 4 to <10 kg, 1000 mg every 12 hours for a weight of 10 to <14 kg, or 1500 mg every 12 hours for a weight of 14 to <20 kg). The primary outcome was treatment failure during the 3-day course of amoxicillin or placebo. The prespecified noninferiority margin was 1.75 percentage points. RESULTS: From November 9, 2014, through November 30, 2017, a total of 4002 children underwent randomization (1999 in the placebo group and 2003 in the amoxicillin group). In the per-protocol analysis, the incidence of treatment failure was 4.9% among placebo recipients (95 of 1927 children) and 2.6% among amoxicillin recipients (51 of 1929 children) (between-group difference, 2.3 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.9 to 3.7). Results were similar in the intention-to-treat analysis. The presence of fever and wheeze predicted treatment failure. The number needed to treat to prevent one treatment failure was 44 (95% CI, 31 to 80). One patient (<0.1%) in each group died. Relapse occurred in 40 children (2.2%) in the placebo group and in 58 children (3.1%) in the amoxicillin group. CONCLUSIONS: Among children younger than 5 years of age with nonsevere pneumonia, the frequency of treatment failure was higher in the placebo group than in the amoxicillin group, a difference that did not meet the noninferiority margin for placebo. (Funded by the Joint Global Health Trials Scheme [of the Department for International Development, Medical Research Council, and Wellcome] and others; RETAPP ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02372461.).

Trial of Galcanezumab in Prevention of Episodic Cluster Headache.

BACKGROUND: Episodic cluster headache is a disabling neurologic disorder that is characterized by daily headache attacks that occur over periods of weeks or months. Galcanezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody to calcitonin gene-related peptide, may be a preventive treatment for cluster headache. METHODS: We enrolled patients who had at least one attack every other day, at least four total attacks, and no more than eight attacks per day during a baseline assessment, as well as a history of cluster headache periods lasting at least 6 weeks, and randomly assigned them to receive galcanezumab (at a dose of 300 mg) or placebo, administered subcutaneously at baseline and at 1 month. The primary end point was the mean change from baseline in the weekly frequency of cluster headache attacks across weeks 1 through 3 after receipt of the first dose. The key secondary end point was the percentage of patients who had a reduction from baseline of at least 50% in the weekly frequency of cluster headache attacks at week 3. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: Recruitment was halted before the trial reached the planned sample size of 162 because too few volunteers met the eligibility criteria. Of 106 enrolled patients, 49 were randomly assigned to receive galcanezumab and 57 to receive placebo. The mean (±SD) number of cluster headache attacks per week in the baseline period was 17.8±10.1 in the galcanezumab group and 17.3±10.1 in the placebo group. The mean reduction in the weekly frequency of cluster headache attacks across weeks 1 through 3 was 8.7 attacks in the galcanezumab group, as compared with 5.2 in the placebo group (difference, 3.5 attacks per week; 95% confidence interval, 0.2 to 6.7; P = 0.04). The percentage of patients who had a reduction of at least 50% in headache frequency at week 3 was 71% in the galcanezumab group and 53% in the placebo group. There were no substantial between-group differences in the incidence of adverse events, except that 8% of the patients in the galcanezumab group had injection-site pain. CONCLUSIONS: Galcanezumab administered subcutaneously at a dose of 300 mg once monthly reduced the weekly frequency of attacks of episodic cluster headache across weeks 1 through 3 after the initial injection, as compared with placebo. (Funded by Eli Lilly; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02397473.).

Rimegepant, an Oral Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Receptor Antagonist, for Migraine.

BACKGROUND: Calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor has been implicated in the pathogenesis of migraine. Rimegepant is an orally administered, small-molecule, calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist that may be effective in acute migraine treatment. METHODS: In a multicenter, double-blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned adults with at least a 1-year history of migraine and two to eight migraine attacks of moderate or severe intensity per month to receive rimegepant orally at a dose of 75 mg or matching placebo for the treatment of a single migraine attack. The primary end points were freedom from pain and freedom from the most bothersome symptom (other than pain) identified by the patient, both of which were assessed 2 hours after the dose of rimegepant or placebo was administered. RESULTS: A total of 1186 patients were randomly assigned to receive rimegepant (594 patients) or placebo (592 patients); of these, 537 patients in the rimegepant group and 535 patients in the placebo group could be evaluated for efficacy. The overall mean age of the patients evaluated for efficacy was 40.6 years, and 88.7% were women. In a modified intention-to-treat analysis, the percentage of patients who were pain-free 2 hours after receiving the dose was 19.6% in the rimegepant group and 12.0% in the placebo group (absolute difference, 7.6 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.3 to 11.9; P<0.001). The percentage of patients who were free from their most bothersome symptom 2 hours after the dose was 37.6% in the rimegepant group and 25.2% in the placebo group (absolute difference, 12.4 percentage points; 95% CI, 6.9 to 17.9; P<0.001). The most common adverse events were nausea and urinary tract infection. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of a migraine attack with the oral calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist rimegepant resulted in a higher percentage of patients who were free of pain and free from their most bothersome symptom than placebo. (Funded by Biohaven Pharmaceuticals; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03237845.).

Placebo-Controlled Trial of an Oral BTK Inhibitor in Multiple Sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK) regulates the functions of B cells and myeloid cells that are implicated in the pathogenesis of multiple sclerosis. Evobrutinib is a selective oral BTK inhibitor that has been shown to inhibit B-cell activation both in vitro and in vivo. METHODS: In this double-blind, randomized, phase 2 trial, we assigned patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis to one of five groups: placebo, evobrutinib (at a dose of 25 mg once daily, 75 mg once daily, or 75 mg twice daily), or open-label dimethyl fumarate (DMF) as a reference. The primary end point was the total (cumulative) number of gadolinium-enhancing lesions identified on T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging at weeks 12, 16, 20, and 24. Key secondary end points included the annualized relapse rate and change from baseline in the score on the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS). RESULTS: A total of 267 patients were randomly assigned to a trial group. The mean (±SD) total number of gadolinium-enhancing lesions during weeks 12 through 24 was 3.85±5.44 in the placebo group, 4.06±8.02 in the evobrutinib 25-mg group, 1.69±4.69 in the evobrutinib 75-mg once-daily group, 1.15±3.70 in the evobrutinib 75-mg twice-daily group, and 4.78±22.05 in the DMF group. The baseline adjusted rate ratios for the total number of lesions over time as compared with placebo were 1.45 in the evobrutinib 25-mg group (P = 0.32), 0.30 in the evobrutinib 75-mg once-daily group (P = 0.005), and 0.44 in the evobrutinib 75-mg twice-daily group (P = 0.06). The unadjusted annualized relapse rate at week 24 was 0.37 in the placebo group, 0.57 in the evobrutinib 25-mg group, 0.13 in the evobrutinib 75-mg once-daily group, 0.08 in the evobrutinib 75-mg twice-daily group, and 0.20 in the DMF group. There was no significant effect of trial group on the change from baseline in the EDSS score. Elevations in liver aminotransferase values were observed with evobrutinib. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis who received 75 mg of evobrutinib once daily had significantly fewer enhancing lesions during weeks 12 through 24 than those who received placebo. There was no significant difference with placebo for either the 25-mg once-daily or 75-mg twice-daily dose of evobrutinib, nor in the annualized relapse rate or disability progression at any dose. Longer and larger trials are required to determine the effect and risks of evobrutinib in patients with multiple sclerosis. (Funded by EMD Serono; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02975349.).

B-cell depletion with obinutuzumab for the treatment of proliferative lupus nephritis: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Randomised trials of type I anti-CD20 antibodies rituximab and ocrelizumab failed to show benefit in proliferative lupus nephritis (LN). We compared obinutuzumab, a humanised type II anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody that induces potent B-cell depletion, with placebo for the treatment of LN in combination with standard therapies. METHODS: Patients with LN receiving mycophenolate and corticosteroids were randomised to obinutuzumab 1000 mg or placebo on day 1 and weeks 2, 24 and 26, and followed through week 104. The primary endpoint was complete renal response (CRR) at week 52. Exploratory analyses through week 104 were conducted. The prespecified alpha level was 0.2. RESULTS: A total of 125 patients were randomised and received blinded infusions. Achievement of CRR was greater with obinutuzumab at week 52 (primary endpoint, 22 (35%) vs 14 (23%) with placebo; percentage difference, 12% (95% CI -3.4% to 28%), p=0.115) and at week 104 (26 (41%) vs 14 (23%); percentage difference, 19% (95% CI 2.7% to 35%), p=0.026). Improvements in other renal response measures, serologies, estimated glomerular filtration rate and proteinuria were greater with obinutuzumab. Obinutuzumab was not associated with increases in serious adverse events, serious infections or deaths. Non-serious infusion-related reactions occurred more frequently with obinutuzumab. CONCLUSIONS: Improved renal responses through week 104 were observed in patients with LN who received obinutuzumab plus standard therapies compared with standard therapies alone. Obinutuzumab was well tolerated and no new safety signals were identified. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02550652.

Remotely Provided Open-Label Placebo Reduces Frequency of and Impairment by Allergic Symptoms.

OBJECTIVE: Placebos being prescribed with full honesty and disclosure (i.e., open-label placebo [OLP]) have been shown to reduce symptom burden in a variety of conditions. With regard to allergic rhinitis, previous research provided inconclusive evidence for the effects of OLP, possibly related to a separate focus on either symptom severity or symptom frequency. Overcoming this limitation of previous research, the present study aimed to examine the effects of OLP on both the severity and frequency of allergic symptoms. METHODS: In a randomized-controlled trial, patients with allergic rhinitis ( N = 74) were randomized to OLP or treatment as usual (TAU). Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, OLP was administered remotely in a virtual clinical encounter. Participants took placebo tablets for 14 days. The primary outcomes were the severity and frequency of allergic symptoms. The secondary end point was allergy-related impairment. RESULTS: OLP did not significantly improve symptom severity over TAU ( F (1,71) = 3.280, p = .074, η2 = 0.044) but did reduce symptom frequency ( F (1,71) = 7.272, p = .009, η2 = 0.093) and allergy-related impairment more than TAU ( F (1,71) = 6.445, p = .013, η2 = 0.083), reflecting medium to large effects. The use of other antiallergic medication did not influence the results. CONCLUSIONS: Although OLP was able to lower the frequency of allergic symptoms and allergy-related impairment substantially, its effects on symptom severity were weaker. The remote provision of OLP suggests that physical contact between patients and providers might not be necessary for OLP to work.

A Placebo-Controlled Trial of Bezafibrate in Primary Biliary Cholangitis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with primary biliary cholangitis who have an inadequate response to therapy with ursodeoxycholic acid are at high risk for disease progression. Fibrates, which are agonists of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors, in combination with ursodeoxycholic acid, have shown potential benefit in patients with this condition. METHODS: In this 24-month, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 100 patients who had had an inadequate response to ursodeoxycholic acid according to the Paris 2 criteria to receive bezafibrate at a daily dose of 400 mg (50 patients), or placebo (50 patients), in addition to continued treatment with ursodeoxycholic acid. The primary outcome was a complete biochemical response, which was defined as normal levels of total bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase, aminotransferases, and albumin, as well as a normal prothrombin index (a derived measure of prothrombin time), at 24 months. RESULTS: The primary outcome occurred in 31% of the patients assigned to bezafibrate and in 0% assigned to placebo (difference, 31 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, 10 to 50; P<0.001). Normal levels of alkaline phosphatase were observed in 67% of the patients in the bezafibrate group and in 2% in the placebo group. Results regarding changes in pruritus, fatigue, and noninvasive measures of liver fibrosis, including liver stiffness and Enhanced Liver Fibrosis score, were consistent with the results of the primary outcome. Two patients in each group had complications from end-stage liver disease. The creatinine level increased 5% from baseline in the bezafibrate group and decreased 3% in the placebo group. Myalgia occurred in 20% of the patients in the bezafibrate group and in 10% in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with primary biliary cholangitis who had had an inadequate response to ursodeoxycholic acid alone, treatment with bezafibrate in addition to ursodeoxycholic acid resulted in a rate of complete biochemical response that was significantly higher than the rate with placebo and ursodeoxycholic acid therapy. (Funded by Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique and Arrow Génériques; BEZURSO ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01654731 .).

Association between levosimendan, postoperative AKI, and mortality in cardiac surgery: Insights from the LEVO-CTS trial.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate the association between levosimendan treatment and acute kidney injury (AKI) as well as assess the clinical sequelae of AKI in cardiac surgery patients with depressed left ventricular function (ejection fraction <35%). METHODS: Patients in the LEVO-CTS trial undergoing on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), valve, or CABG/valve surgery were stratified by occurrence and severity of postoperative AKI using the AKIN classification. The association between levosimendan infusion and AKI was modeled using multivariable regression. RESULTS: Among 854 LEVO-CTS patients, 231 (27.0%) experienced postoperative AKI, including 182 (21.3%) with stage 1, 35 (4.1%) with stage 2, and 14 (1.6%) with stage 3 AKI. The rate of AKI was similar between patients receiving levosimendan or placebo. The odds of 30-day mortality significantly increased by AKI stage compared to those without AKI (stage 1: adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.8-4.9; stage 2: aOR 9.1, 95% CI 3.2-25.7; stage 3: aOR 12.4, 95% CI 3.0-50.4). No association was observed between levosimendan, AKI stage, and odds of 30-day mortality (interaction P = .69). Factors independently associated with AKI included increasing age, body mass index, diabetes, and increasing baseline systolic blood pressure. Increasing baseline eGFR and aldosterone antagonist use were associated with a lower risk of AKI. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative AKI is common among high-risk patients undergoing cardiac surgery and associated with significantly increased risk of 30-day death or dialysis. Levosimendan was not associated with the risk of AKI.