Dataset Information

Protocol for a phase 1 homeopathic drug proving trial.

ABSTRACT: This study protocol adapts the traditional homeopathic drug proving methodology to a modern clinical trial design.Multi-centre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 1 trial with 30 healthy volunteers. The study consists of a seven day run-in period, a five day intervention period and a 16 day post-intervention observation period. Subjects, investigators and the statisticians are blinded from the allocation to the study arm and from the identity of the homeopathic drug. The intervention is a highly diluted homeopathic drug (potency C12 = 1024), Dose: 5 globules taken 5 times per day over a maximum period of 5 days. The placebo consists of an optically identical carrier substance (sucrose globules). Subjects document the symptoms they experience in a semi-structured online diary. The primary outcome parameter is the number of specific symptoms that characterise the intervention compared to the placebo after a period of three weeks. Secondary outcome parameters are qualitative differences in profiles of characteristic and proving symptoms and the total number of all proving symptoms. The number of symptoms will be quantitatively analysed on an intention-to-treat basis using ANCOVA with the subject's expectation and baseline values as covariates. Content analysis according to Mayring is adapted to suit the homeopathic qualitative analysis procedure.Homeopathic drug proving trials using the terminology of clinical trials according GCP and fulfilling current requirements for research under the current drug regulations is feasible. However, within the current regulations, homeopathic drug proving trials are classified as phase 1 trials, although their aim is not to explore the safety and pharmacological dynamics of the drug, but rather to find clinical indications according to the theory of homeopathy. To avoid bias, it is necessary that neither the subjects nor the investigators know the identity of the drug. This requires a modification to the informed consent process and blinded study materials. Because it is impossible to distinguish between adverse events and proving symptoms, both must be documented together.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01061229.

SUBMITTER: Teut M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2917434 | biostudies-literature | 2010 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Protocol for a phase 1 homeopathic drug proving trial.

Teut Michael M Hirschberg Ute U Luedtke Rainer R Schnegg Cristoph C Dahler Joern J Albrecht Henning H Witt Claudia M CM

Trials 20100722

<h4>Background</h4>This study protocol adapts the traditional homeopathic drug proving methodology to a modern clinical trial design.<h4>Method</h4>Multi-centre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 1 trial with 30 healthy volunteers. The study consists of a seven day run-in period, a five day intervention period and a 16 day post-intervention observation period. Subjects, investigators and the statisticians are blinded from the allocation to the study arm and from the identity of ...[more]

PMID: 20649979

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundHomeopathic drug proving is a basic concept in homeopathy. This study aimed to record symptoms produced by a homeopathic drug compared with placebo.MethodsThis multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 1 trial consisted of a 7-day run-in period, a 5-day intervention period and a 16-day post-intervention observation period. Subjects, investigators and statisticians were blinded for intervention groups and identity of the homeopathic drug. Subjects in the intervention group received Okoubaka aubrevillei (potency C12) and subjects in the placebo group received the optically identical sucrose globules. Dosage in both groups was five globules taken five times per day over a maximum period of 5 days. Subjects documented the symptoms they experienced in a semistructured online diary. The primary outcome parameter was the number of characteristic proving symptoms compared with placebo after a period of 3 weeks. Characteristic symptoms were categorised using content analysis. Secondary outcome parameters were the qualitative differences in profiles of characteristic and proving symptoms and the total number of all proving symptoms. The number of symptoms was quantitatively analysed on an intention-to-treat basis using analyses of covariance with the subject's expectation and baseline values as covariates.ResultsThirty-one subjects were included (19 Okoubaka and 12 placebo). Data for 29 participants could be analysed. No significant differences in number of characteristic symptoms in both groups were observed between Okoubaka (mean±standard deviation 5.4±6.0) and placebo (4.9±5.6). The odds ratio for observation of a characteristic symptom was 1.11 (95% confidence interval 0.4 to 3.05, P=0.843). Females and subjects expecting a higher number of symptoms at baseline or feeling more sensitive to homeopathic drugs experienced more characteristic symptoms regardless of allocation. The qualitative analysis showed an inter-coder reliability of 0.69 (95% confidence interval 0.62 to 0.76). The qualitative comparison of symptom profiles was inconclusive.ConclusionsCombined results of qualitative and quantitative methods did not result in a significant difference of characteristic proving symptoms between O. aubrevillei C12 and placebo. The qualitative comparison of the symptom profiles leaves some open questions. The nocebo effect might be a plausible explanation for most of the phenomena observed in this trial.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01061229.

Project description:IntroductionPancreatic cancer is the fourth-leading cause of cancer-related death in developed countries. Despite advances in systemic chemotherapy, the mainstay of curative therapy for non-metastatic disease is surgical resection. However, the perioperative period is characterised by stress and inflammatory reactions that can contribute to metastatic spread and disease recurrence. Catecholamines and prostaglandins play a crucial role in these reactions. Therefore, a drug repurposing of betablockers and cyclooxygenase inhibitors seems reasonable to attenuate tumour-associated inflammation by inhibiting psychological, surgical and inflammatory stress responses. This may cause a relevant antitumourigenic and antimetastatic effect during the perioperative period, a window for cancer-directed therapy that is currently largely unexploited.Methods and analysisThis is a prospective, single-centre, two-arm randomised, patient and observer blinded, placebo-controlled, phase-II trial evaluating safety and feasibility of combined perioperative treatment with propranolol and etodolac in adult patients with non-metastatic cancer of the pancreatic head undergoing elective pancreatoduodenectomy. 100 patients fulfilling the eligibility criteria will be randomised to perioperative treatment for 25 days perioperatively with a combination of propranolol and etodolac or placebo. Primary outcome of interest will be safety in terms of serious adverse events and reactions within 3 months. Furthermore, adherence to trial medication will be assessed as feasibility outcomes. Preliminary efficacy data will be evaluated for the purpose of power calculation for a potential subsequent phase-III trial. The clinical trial is accompanied by a translational study investigating the mechanisms of action of the combined therapy on a molecular basis.Ethics and disseminationThe PROSPER-trial has been approved by the German Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (reference number 4042875) and the Ethics Committee of the Medical Faculty of the University of Heidelberg (reference number AFmo-385/2018). The final trial results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and will be presented at appropriate national and international conferences.Trial registration numbersDRKS00014054; EudraCT number: 2018-000415-25.

Project description:BackgroundThe objective of focal brachytherapy (BT) is to provide effective prostate cancer control for low-risk disease but with reduced genitourinary, gastrointestinal and sexual side effects in a cost-effective way.ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to describe a phase II study examining technical and dosimetric feasibility and toxicity, quality of life changes, and local control with post-treatment biopsy outcomes in men with early stage low volume prostate cancer treated with focal iodine-125 seed BT.MethodsThe study design is a prospective, multicenter trial with a planned sample size of 20 patients including men with a minimum age of 60 years, a life expectancy estimated to be greater than 10 years, with low or low-tier intermediate risk prostate cancer, unilateral disease on the biopsy, and a Gleason score of ≤3+4 and <25% cores involved. The investigations specific for the study are multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (Mp-MRI) baseline, at 20 and 36 months to rule out high grade disease and a transperineal mapping biopsy (baseline and at 36 months) for more accurate patient selection. The hemigland region will receive 144 Gy. Standard normal tissue constraints will be considered as for a whole gland (WG) implant. Dosimetric parameters will be evaluated at day 30 after the implant. Toxicity and quality of life will be evaluated with international validated questionnaires focusing on urinary, rectal, sexual domain, and general health-related quality of life. The patients will complete this assessment at baseline and then approximately every 6 months after the implant up to 10 years.ResultsTo date, one patient is involved in the trial. He underwent the pre-implant investigations which found bilateral disease. Therefore, a standard seed implant was performed. If the results from this trial provide evidence that the treatment is safe, feasible, and improves toxicity, funding will be sought to conduct a large, multicenter, randomized controlled trial (RCT).ConclusionsThis protocol is designed to show feasibility in delivering hemigland focal therapy with seed BT. It may answer crucial questions and obtain data which will enable downstream decisions on focal low dose rate (LDR) prostate BT.ClinicaltrialClinicaltrial.gov NCT02643511; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02643511 (Archived by Webcite at http://www.webcitation.org/6ghLCzIhY).

Project description:BackgroundGlioblastoma is the most common and most aggressive malignant primary brain tumor in adults. Glioblastoma cells synthesize and secrete large quantities of the excitatory neurotransmitter glutamate, driving epilepsy, neuronal death, tumor growth and invasion. Moreover, neuronal networks interconnect with glioblastoma cell networks through glutamatergic neuroglial synapses, activation of which induces oncogenic calcium oscillations that are propagated via gap junctions between tumor cells. The primary objective of this study is to explore the efficacy of brain-penetrating anti-glutamatergic drugs to standard chemoradiotherapy in patients with glioblastoma.Methods/designGLUGLIO is a 1:1 randomized phase Ib/II, parallel-group, open-label, multicenter trial of gabapentin, sulfasalazine, memantine and chemoradiotherapy (Arm A) versus chemoradiotherapy alone (Arm B) in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Planned accrual is 120 patients. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival at 6 months. Secondary endpoints include overall and seizure-free survival, quality of life of patients and caregivers, symptom burden and cognitive functioning. Glutamate levels will be assessed longitudinally by magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Other outcomes of interest include imaging response rate, neuronal hyperexcitability determined by longitudinal electroencephalography, Karnofsky performance status as a global measure of overall performance, anticonvulsant drug use and steroid use. Tumor tissue and blood will be collected for translational research. Subgroup survival analyses by baseline parameters include segregation by age, extent of resection, Karnofsky performance status, O6-methylguanine DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promotor methylation status, steroid intake, presence or absence of seizures, tumor volume and glutamate levels determined by MR spectroscopy. The trial is currently recruiting in seven centers in Switzerland.Trial registrationNCT05664464. Registered 23 December 2022.

Dataset Information

Protocol for a phase 1 homeopathic drug proving trial.

Publications

Protocol for a phase 1 homeopathic drug proving trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets