Molecular Hydrogen for Outpatients with COVID-19 (Hydro-COVID): A Phase 3 Randomised, Triple-Blinded, Pragmatic, Placebo-Controlled, Multicentre Trial.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Gaboreau Y
PROVIDER: S-EPMC11313273 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Molecular Hydrogen for Outpatients with COVID-19 (Hydro-COVID): A Phase 3 Randomised, Triple-Blinded, Pragmatic, Placebo-Controlled, Multicentre Trial.
Gaboreau Yoann Y Milovančev Aleksandra A Rolland Carole C Eychenne Claire C Alcaraz Jean-Pierre JP Ihl Cordelia C Mazet Roseline R Boucher François F Vermorel Celine C Ostojic Sergej M SM Borel Jean-Christian JC Cinquin Philippe P Bosson Jean-Luc JL
Journal of clinical medicine 20240724 15
<b>Background</b>. Due to its antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, anti-apoptosis, and anti-fatigue properties, molecular hydrogen (H<sub>2</sub>) is potentially a novel therapeutic nutrient for patients with coronavirus acute disease 2019 (COVID-19). We determined the efficacy and safety profile of hydrogen-rich water (HRW) to reduce the risk of COVID-19 progression. <b>Methods</b>: We also conducted a phase 3, triple-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate treatment with HRW initiat ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionA novel coronavirus, designated SARS-CoV-2, caused an international outbreak of a respiratory illness, termed COVID-19 in December 2019. There is a lack of specific therapeutic agents based on evidence for this novel coronavirus infection; however, several medications have been evaluated as a potential therapy. Therapy is required to treat symptomatic patients and decrease the virus carriage duration to limit the communitytransmission.Methods and analysisWe hypothesise that patients with mild COVID-19 treated with favipiravir will have a shorter duration of time to virus clearance than the control group. The primary outcome is to evaluate the effect of favipiravir on the timing of the PCR test conversion from positive to negative within 15 days after starting the medicine.Adults (>18 years, men or nonpregnant women, diagnosed with mild COVID-19 within 5 days of disease onset) are being recruited by physicians participating from the Ministry of National Guard Health Affairs and the Ministry of Health ethics committee approved primary healthcare centres. This double-blind, randomised trial comprises three significant parts: screening, treatment and a follow-up period. The treating physician and patients are blinded. Eligible participants are randomised in a 1:1 ratio to either the therapy group (favipiravir) or a control group (placebo) with 1800 mg by mouth two times per day for the first day, followed by 800 mg two times per day for 4-7 days. Serial nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swab samples are obtained on day 1 (5 days before therapy). On day5±1 day, 10±1 day, 15±2 days, extra nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal PCR COVID-19 samples are requested.The primary analysis population for evaluating both the efficacy and safety outcomes will be a modified intention to treat population. Anticipating a 10% dropout rate, we expect to recruit 288 subjects per arm. The results assume that the hazard ratio is constant throughout the study and that the Cox proportional hazard regression is used to analyse the data.Ethics and disseminationThe study was approved by the King Abdullah International Medical Research Centre Institutional Review Board (28 April 2020) and the Ministry of Health Institutional Review Board (1 July 2020). Protocol details and any amendments will be reported to https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04464408. The results will be published in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberNational Clinical Trial Registry (NCT04464408).
| S-EPMC8053307 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEvidence suggests a role for excessive inflammation in COVID-19 complications. Colchicine is an oral anti-inflammatory medication beneficial in gout, pericarditis, and coronary disease. We aimed to investigate the effect of colchicine on the composite of COVID-19-related death or hospital admission.MethodsThe present study is a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, adaptive, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial. The study was done in Brazil, Canada, Greece, South Africa, Spain, and the USA, and was led by the Montreal Heart Institute. Patients with COVID-19 diagnosed by PCR testing or clinical criteria who were not being treated in hospital were eligible if they were at least 40 years old and had at least one high-risk characteristic. The randomisation list was computer-generated by an unmasked biostatistician, and masked randomisation was centralised and done electronically through an automated interactive web-response system. The allocation sequence was unstratified and used a 1:1 ratio with a blocking schema and block sizes of six. Patients were randomly assigned to receive orally administered colchicine (0·5 mg twice per day for 3 days and then once per day for 27 days thereafter) or matching placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was the composite of death or hospital admission for COVID-19. Vital status at the end of the study was available for 97·9% of patients. The analyses were done according to the intention-to-treat principle. The COLCORONA trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04322682) and is now closed to new participants.FindingsTrial enrolment began in March 23, 2020, and was completed in Dec 22, 2020. A total of 4488 patients (53·9% women; median age 54·0 years, IQR 47·0-61·0) were enrolled and 2235 patients were randomly assigned to colchicine and 2253 to placebo. The primary endpoint occurred in 104 (4·7%) of 2235 patients in the colchicine group and 131 (5·8%) of 2253 patients in the placebo group (odds ratio [OR] 0·79, 95·1% CI 0·61-1·03; p=0·081). Among the 4159 patients with PCR-confirmed COVID-19, the primary endpoint occurred in 96 (4·6%) of 2075 patients in the colchicine group and 126 (6·0%) of 2084 patients in the placebo group (OR 0·75, 0·57-0·99; p=0·042). Serious adverse events were reported in 108 (4·9%) of 2195 patients in the colchicine group and 139 (6·3%) of 2217 patients in the placebo group (p=0·051); pneumonia occurred in 63 (2·9%) of 2195 patients in the colchicine group and 92 (4·1%) of 2217 patients in the placebo group (p=0·021). Diarrhoea was reported in 300 (13·7%) of 2195 patients in the colchicine group and 161 (7·3%) of 2217 patients in the placebo group (p<0·0001).InterpretationIn community-treated patients including those without a mandatory diagnostic test, the effect of colchicine on COVID-19-related clinical events was not statistically significant. Among patients with PCR-confirmed COVID-19, colchicine led to a lower rate of the composite of death or hospital admission than placebo. Given the absence of orally administered therapies to prevent COVID-19 complications in community-treated patients and the benefit of colchicine in patients with PCR-proven COVID-19, this safe and inexpensive anti-inflammatory agent could be considered for use in those at risk of complications. Notwithstanding these considerations, replication in other studies of PCR-positive community-treated patients is recommended.FundingThe Government of Quebec, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the US National Institutes of Health, the Montreal Heart Institute Foundation, the NYU Grossman School of Medicine, the Rudin Family Foundation, and philanthropist Sophie Desmarais.
| S-EPMC8159193 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionBronchiectasis is a long-term lung condition, with dilated bronchi, chronic inflammation, chronic infection and acute exacerbations. Recurrent exacerbations are associated with poorer clinical outcomes such as increased severity of lung disease, further exacerbations, hospitalisations, reduced quality of life and increased risk of death. Despite an increasing prevalence of bronchiectasis, there is a critical lack of high-quality studies into the disease and no treatments specifically approved for its treatment. This trial aims to establish whether inhaled dual bronchodilators (long acting beta agonist (LABA) and long acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)) taken as either a stand-alone therapy or in combination with inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) reduce the number of exacerbations of bronchiectasis requiring treatment with antibiotics during a 12 month treatment period.MethodsThis is a multicentre, pragmatic, double-blind, randomised controlled trial, incorporating an internal pilot and embedded economic evaluation. 600 adult patients (≥18 years) with CT confirmed bronchiectasis will be recruited and randomised to either inhaled dual therapy (LABA+LAMA), triple therapy (LABA+LAMA+ICS) or matched placebo, in a 2:2:1 ratio (respectively). The primary outcome is the number of protocol defined exacerbations requiring treatment with antibiotics during the 12 month treatment period.Ethics and disseminationFavourable ethical opinion was received from the North East-Newcastle and North Tyneside 2 Research Ethics Committee (reference: 21/NE/0020). Results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed publications, at national and international conferences, in the NIHR Health Technology Assessments journal and to participants and the public (using lay language).Trial registration numberISRCTN15988757.
| S-EPMC10423789 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To assess the efficacy of a single preoperative physiotherapy session to reduce postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) after upper abdominal surgery. DESIGN:Prospective, pragmatic, multicentre, patient and assessor blinded, parallel group, randomised placebo controlled superiority trial. SETTING:Multidisciplinary preadmission clinics at three tertiary public hospitals in Australia and New Zealand. PARTICIPANTS:441 adults aged 18 years or older who were within six weeks of elective major open upper abdominal surgery were randomly assigned through concealed allocation to receive either an information booklet (n=219; control) or preoperative physiotherapy (n=222; intervention) and followed for 12 months. 432 completed the trial. INTERVENTIONS:Preoperatively, participants received an information booklet (control) or an additional 30 minute physiotherapy education and breathing exercise training session (intervention). Education focused on PPCs and their prevention through early ambulation and self directed breathing exercises to be initiated immediately on regaining consciousness after surgery. Postoperatively, all participants received standardised early ambulation, and no additional respiratory physiotherapy was provided. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:The primary outcome was a PPC within 14 postoperative hospital days assessed daily using the Melbourne group score. Secondary outcomes were hospital acquired pneumonia, length of hospital stay, utilisation of intensive care unit services, and hospital costs. Patient reported health related quality of life, physical function, and post-discharge complications were measured at six weeks, and all cause mortality was measured to 12 months. RESULTS:The incidence of PPCs within 14 postoperative hospital days, including hospital acquired pneumonia, was halved (adjusted hazard ratio 0.48, 95% confidence interval 0.30 to 0.75, P=0.001) in the intervention group compared with the control group, with an absolute risk reduction of 15% (95% confidence interval 7% to 22%) and a number needed to treat of 7 (95% confidence interval 5 to 14). No significant differences in other secondary outcomes were detected. CONCLUSION:In a general population of patients listed for elective upper abdominal surgery, a 30 minute preoperative physiotherapy session provided within existing hospital multidisciplinary preadmission clinics halves the incidence of PPCs and specifically hospital acquired pneumonia. Further research is required to investigate benefits to mortality and length of stay. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ANZCTR 12613000664741.
| S-EPMC5782401 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionSubarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH) from a ruptured cerebral aneurysm carries high morbidity and mortality. Despite huge advances in techniques to secure the aneurysm, there has been little progress in the treatment of the deleterious effects of the haemorrhage.Sulforaphane is an Nrf2 inducer with anti-oxidant and anti-inflammatory properties. It has been shown to improve clinical outcome in experimental models of SAH, but is unstable. SFX-01 (Evgen Pharma) is a novel composition comprised of synthetic sulforaphane stabilised within an α-cyclodextrin complex. On ingestion, the complex releases sulforaphane making SFX-01 an ideal vehicle for delivery of sulforaphane.Methods and analysisThe objective of the study is to assess the safety, pharmacokinetics and efficacy of SFX-01. This is a prospective, multicentre, randomised, double-blind placebo-controlled trial in patients aged 18-80 years with aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage in the previous 48 hours. 90 patients will be randomised to receive SFX-01 (300 mg) or placebo two times per day for up to 28 days.Safety will be assessed using blood tests and adverse event reporting.Pharmacokinetics will be assessed based on paired blood and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) sulforaphane levels on day 7. A subgroup will have hourly samples taken during 6 hours post-dosing on days 1 and 7. Pharmacodynamics will be assessed by haptoglobin and malondialdehyde levels, and maximum flow velocity of middle cerebral artery will be measured by transcranial Doppler ultrasound.Clinical outcomes will be assessed at days 28, 90 and 180 with modified Rankin Scale, Glasgow Outcome Score, SAH Outcome Tool, Short Form-36, Brain Injury Community Rehabilitation Outcome Scales and Check List for Cognitive and Emotional consequences following stroke. MRI at 6 months including quantitative susceptibility mapping and volumetric T1 will measure iron deposition and cortical volume.Safety, CSF sulforaphane concentration and middle cerebral artery flow velocity will be primary outcomes and all others secondary.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was obtained from South Central Hampshire A committee. Outcomes of the trial will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.Trial registration numberNCT02614742.
| S-EPMC7170552 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Antiandrogens have demonstrated a protective effect for COVOD-19 patients in observational and interventional studies. The goal of this study was to determine if proxalutamide, an androgen receptor antagonist, could be an effective treatment for men with COVID-19 in an outpatient setting. A randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial was conducted at two outpatient centers (Brasilia, Brazil). Patients were recruited from October 21 to December 24, 2020 (clinicaltrials.gov number, NCT04446429). Male patients with confirmed COVID-19 but not requiring hospitalization (COVID-19 8-point ordinal scale <3) were administered proxalutamide 200 mg/day or placebo for up to 7 days. The primary endpoint was hospitalization rate at 30 days post-randomization. A total of 268 men were randomized in a 1:1 ratio. 134 patients receiving proxalutamide and 134 receiving placebo were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. The 30-day hospitalization rate was 2.2% in men taking proxalutamide compared to 26% in placebo, P < 0.001. The 30-day hospitalization risk ratio was 0.09; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.03-0.27. Patients in the proxalutamide arm more frequently reported gastrointestinal adverse events, however, no patient discontinued treatment. In placebo group, 6 patients were lost during follow-up, and 2 patients died from acute respiratory distress syndrome. Here we demonstrate the hospitalization rate in proxalutamide treated men was reduced by 91% compared to usual care.
| S-EPMC8326462 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo assess the effectiveness of prone positioning to reduce the risk of death or respiratory failure in non-critically ill patients admitted to hospital with covid-19.DesignMulticentre pragmatic randomised clinical trial.Setting15 hospitals in Canada and the United States from May 2020 until May 2021.ParticipantsEligible patients had a laboratory confirmed or a clinically highly suspected diagnosis of covid-19, needed supplemental oxygen (up to 50% fraction of inspired oxygen), and were able to independently lie prone with verbal instruction. Of the 570 patients who were assessed for eligibility, 257 were randomised and 248 were included in the analysis.InterventionPatients were randomised 1:1 to prone positioning (that is, instructing a patient to lie on their stomach while they are in bed) or standard of care (that is, no instruction to adopt prone position).Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital death, mechanical ventilation, or worsening respiratory failure defined as needing at least 60% fraction of inspired oxygen for at least 24 hours. Secondary outcomes included the change in the ratio of oxygen saturation to fraction of inspired oxygen.ResultsThe trial was stopped early on the basis of futility for the pre-specified primary outcome. The median time from hospital admission until randomisation was 1 day, the median age of patients was 56 (interquartile range 45-65) years, 89 (36%) patients were female, and 222 (90%) were receiving oxygen via nasal prongs at the time of randomisation. The median time spent prone in the first 72 hours was 6 (1.5-12.8) hours in total for the prone arm compared with 0 (0-2) hours in the control arm. The risk of the primary outcome was similar between the prone group (18 (14%) events) and the standard care group (17 (14%) events) (odds ratio 0.92, 95% confidence interval 0.44 to 1.92). The change in the ratio of oxygen saturation to fraction of inspired oxygen after 72 hours was similar for patients randomised to prone positioning and standard of care.ConclusionAmong non-critically ill patients with hypoxaemia who were admitted to hospital with covid-19, a multifaceted intervention to increase prone positioning did not improve outcomes. However, wide confidence intervals preclude definitively ruling out benefit or harm. Adherence to prone positioning was poor, despite multiple efforts to increase it. Subsequent trials of prone positioning should aim to develop strategies to improve adherence to awake prone positioning.Study registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04383613.
| S-EPMC8941343 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate whether the immunomodulatory drug thymosin α1 reduces mortality in adults with sepsis.DesignMulticentre, double blinded, placebo controlled phase 3 trial.Setting22 centres in China, September 2016 to December 2020.Participants1106 adults aged 18-85 years with a diagnosis of sepsis according to sepsis-3 criteria and randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive thymosin α1 (n=552) or placebo (n=554). A stratified block method was used for randomisation, and participants were stratified by age (<60 and ≥60 years) and centre.InterventionsSubcutaneous injection of thymosin α1 or placebo every 12 hours for seven days unless discontinued owing to discharge from the intensive care unit, death, or withdrawal of consent.Main outcome measureThe primary outcome was 28 day all cause mortality after randomisation. All analyses were based on a modified intention-to-treat set, including participants who received at least one dose of study drug.ResultsOf 1106 adults with sepsis enrolled in the study, 1089 were included in the modified intention-to-treat analyses (thymosin α1 group n=542, placebo group n=547). 28 day all cause mortality occurred in 127 participants (23.4%) in the thymosin α1 group and 132 (24.1%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0.99, 95% confidence interval 0.77 to 1.27; P=0.93 with log-rank test). No secondary or safety outcome differed statistically significantly between the two groups. The prespecified subgroup analysis showed a potential differential effect of thymosin α1 on the primary outcome based on age (<60 years: hazard ratio 1.67, 1.04 to 2.67; ≥60 years: 0.81, 0.61 to 1.09; P for interaction=0.01) and diabetes (diabetes: 0.58, 0.35 to 0.99; no diabetes: 1.16, 0.87 to 1.53; P for interaction=0.04).ConclusionsThis trial found no clear evidence to suggest that thymosin α1 decreases 28 day all cause mortality in adults with sepsis.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02867267.
| S-EPMC11780596 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimTo compare prednisone and placebo for the treatment of outpatients treated for acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in a primary care setting.MethodsA multicentre, parallel, double-blind, pragmatic randomised controlled trial was performed in France. A total of 66 general practitioners included patients aged ≥40 years with cumulative smoking of ≥10 pack-years and a diagnosis of certain or likely acute exacerbation of COPD. Oral prednisone (40 mg) or placebo were administered daily for 5 days. The main outcome was treatment failure at 8 weeks, defined as a composite criterion based on the occurrence of at least one of the following: unplanned visit to an emergency department or to a practitioner in the ambulatory setting, hospital admission or death. The planned sample size was 202 patients per group.Results175 patients were included from February 2015 to May 2017 (43% of the planned sample). All-cause 8-week treatment failure rate was 42.0% in the prednisone group and 34.5% in the placebo group (relative risk 1.22, 95% CI 0.87-1.69, p=0.25). Respiratory-related 8-week treatment failure rate was 27.6% in the prednisone group and 13.6% in the placebo group (relative risk 2.00, 95% CI 1.15-3.57, p=0.015).ConclusionAlthough the planned sample size was not achieved, the study does not suggest that oral corticosteroids are more effective than placebo for the treatment of an acute exacerbation of COPD in a primary care setting.
| S-EPMC10493709 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionEmerging evidence has shown that an antibiotic first strategy is a viable treatment option for uncomplicated acute appendicitis (AA). Although there has recently been an interest and increase in the use of antibiotics as the primary strategy for treating uncomplicated AA, there is no consensus regarding the optimum antibiotic regimen. In particular, the long-term outcomes of different antibiotic regimens, such as the recurrence rate, still lack evidence. Given that the flora of the appendix is mainly anaerobic bacteria, we hypothesised that antianaerobe regimens could decrease the recurrence rate compared with those that did not include antianaerobic antibiotics.Methods and analysisThe OPTIMA(Optimising the treatment for uncomplicated acute appendicitis) trial is a multicentre, double-blinded placebo-controlled superiority randomised study aimed to evaluate the role of antianaerobic antibiotics in the resolution of uncomplicated AA. Patients (18-65 years) with uncomplicated AA (without gangrenous, perforated appendicitis, appendiceal abscess, or appendiceal fecaliths) are eligible for inclusion. The primary endpoint of this study is the success rate of the treatment, defined as the resolution of AA resulting in discharge from the hospital without surgical intervention and recurrent symptoms within one year. Secondary endpoints include mortality, postintervention complications, recurrent symptoms up to one year after treatment, hospital stay, sick leave, treatment cost, pain symptom scores and quality of life. Data are reported as the number of cases (%), median (range) and relative risk, which will be analysed using the Mann-Whitney U test or χ2 test, as appropriate. P-value<0.05 will be considered significant.Ethics and disseminationThe protocol has been approved by the Ethics Committee of Jinling Hospital on 13 November 2018 (2018NZKY-027-01). The trial findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberChiCTR1800018896.
| S-EPMC9062814 | biostudies-literature