Dataset Information

Interaction between drug and placebo effects: a cross-over balanced placebo design trial.

ABSTRACT: The total effect of a medication is the sum of its drug effect, placebo effect (meaning response), and their possible interaction. Current interpretation of clinical trials' results assumes no interaction. Demonstrating such an interaction has been difficult due to lack of an appropriate study design.180 adults were randomized to caffeine (300 mg) or placebo groups. Each group received the assigned intervention described by the investigators as caffeine or placebo, in a randomized crossover design. 4-hour-area-under-the-curve of energy, sleepiness, nausea (on 100 mm visual analog scales), and systolic blood pressure levels as well as caffeine pharmacokinetics (in 22 volunteers nested in the caffeine group) were determined. Caffeine drug, placebo, placebo-plus-interaction, and total effects were estimated by comparing outcomes after, receiving caffeine described as placebo to receiving placebo described as placebo, receiving placebo described as caffeine or placebo, receiving caffeine described as caffeine or placebo, and receiving caffeine described as caffeine to receiving placebo described as placebo, respectively.The placebo effect on area-under-the-curve of energy (mean difference) and sleepiness (geometric mean ratio) was larger than placebo-plus-interaction effect (16.6 [95% CI, 4.1 to 29.0] vs. 8.4 [-4.2 to 21.0] mm*hr and 0.58 [0.39 to 0.86] vs. 0.69 [0.49 to 0.97], respectively), similar in size to drug effect (20.8 [3.8 to 37.8] mm*hr and 0.49 [0.30 to 0.91], respectively), and its combination with the later was larger than total caffeine effect (29.5 [11.9 to 47.1] mm*hr and 0.37 [0.22 to 0.64]). Placebo-plus-interaction effect increased caffeine terminal half-life by 0.40 [0.12 to 0.68] hr (P=0.007).Drug and placebo effects of a medication may be less than additive, which influences the interpretation of clinical trials. The placebo effect may increase active drug terminal half-life, a novel mechanism of placebo action.ClinicalTrials.gov identification number - NCT00426010.

SUBMITTER: Hammami MM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2995791 | biostudies-literature | 2010 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Interaction between drug and placebo effects: a cross-over balanced placebo design trial.

Hammami Muhammad M MM Al-Gaai Eman A EA Alvi Syed S Hammami Muhammad B MB

Trials 20101119

<h4>Background</h4>The total effect of a medication is the sum of its drug effect, placebo effect (meaning response), and their possible interaction. Current interpretation of clinical trials' results assumes no interaction. Demonstrating such an interaction has been difficult due to lack of an appropriate study design.<h4>Methods</h4>180 adults were randomized to caffeine (300 mg) or placebo groups. Each group received the assigned intervention described by the investigators as caffeine or plac ...[more]

PMID: 21092089

Similar Datasets

Project description:Conventional randomized placebo-controlled study design assumes the absence of drug*placebo interaction. We hypothesized the presence of such an interaction and that conventionally estimated drug effect might be biased. The objectives of the study were to determine the drug*placebo interaction effect (main) and compare conventionally estimated and interaction model-estimated drug effects (secondary).We used a hybrid of balanced placebo and randomized placebo-controlled designs. Four hundred eighty healthy volunteers were randomized to three groups. The first received hydroxyzine (25 mg) described as hydroxyzine or placebo, the second received placebo described as hydroxyzine or placebo, and the third received hydroxyzine and placebo described as unknown; each in a randomized crossover design. Seven participants failed to crossover. Group assignment was concealed from participants and study coordinators. Coordinators were blinded to group and intervention assignment. Participants and coordinators were deceived as to study objectives. Main outcomes were mean area-under-the-curve of drowsiness (therapeutic outcome) and mouth-dryness (adverse outcome), self-reported on 100 mm visual analog scale over 7 h. Drug, placebo, placebo?+?interaction, and total effects were estimated using analysis of covariance by comparing received hydroxyzine/told placebo to received placebo/told placebo, received placebo/told hydroxyzine to received placebo/told placebo, received hydroxyzine/told hydroxyzine to received hydroxyzine/told placebo, and received hydroxyzine/told hydroxyzine to received placebo/told placebo, respectively. Drug effect was also conventionally estimated in the third group.Mean (SD) age was 31.4 (6.6) years, 65% were males. There was significant difference between placebo?+?interaction effect and placebo effect for both drowsiness and mouth-dryness with a mean difference (95% confidence interval) of 35.1 (5.6 to 64.6) and 23.8 (2.4 to 45.2) mm*hr, respectively. Total effect was larger than the sum of drug and placebo effects for drowsiness (139.7 (109.8 to 169.6) vs. 99.1 (68.2 to 130.0) mm*hr) and mouth-dryness (63.6 (41.1 to 86.1) vs. 34.7 (11.1 to 58.4) mm*hr). Conventionally estimated drug effect was larger than interaction model-estimated drug effect for drowsiness (69.2 (45.5 to 92.8) vs. (58.3 (31.6 to 85.0) mm*hr) and mouth-dryness (19.9 (5.3 to 34.5) vs. 9.5 (-9.2 to 28.1) mm*hr).There is significant and important drug*placebo interaction effect that may bias conventionally estimated drug effect.ClinicalTrial.gov identifier: NCT01501591 (registered December 25, 2011).

Project description:Medication effect is the sum of its drug, placebo, and drug*placebo interaction effects. It is conceivable that the interaction effect involves modulating drug bioavailability; it was previously observed that being aware of caffeine ingestion may prolong caffeine plasma half-life. This study was set to evaluate such concept using different drugs.Balanced single-dose, two-period, two-group, cross-over design was used to compare the pharmacokinetics of oral cephalexin, ibuprofen, and paracetamol, each described by its name (overt) or as placebo (covert). Volunteers and study coordinators were deceived as to study aim. Drug concentrations were determined blindly by in-house, high performance liquid chromatography assays. Terminal-elimination half-life (t½) (primary outcome), maximum concentration (Cmax), Cmax first time (Tmax), terminal-elimination-rate constant (?), area-under-the-concentration-time-curve, to last measured concentration (AUCT), extrapolated to infinity (AUCI), or to Tmax of overt drug (AUCOverttmax), and Cmax/AUCI were calculated blindly using standard non-compartmental method. Covert-vs-overt effect on drug pharmacokinetics was evaluated by analysis-of-variance (ANOVA, primary analysis), 90% confidence interval (CI) using the 80.00-125.00% bioequivalence range, and percentage of individual pharmacokinetic covert/overt ratios that are outside the +25% range.Fifty, 30, and 50 healthy volunteers (18%, 10%, and 6% females, mean (SD) age 30.8 (6.2), 31.4 (6.6), and 31.2 (5.4) years) participated in 3 studies on cephalexin, ibuprofen, and paracetamol, respectively. Withdrawal rate was 4%, 0%, and 4%, respectively. Eighteen blood samples were obtained over 6, 10, and 14 h in each study period of the three drugs, respectively. ANOVA showed no significant difference in any pharmacokinetic parameter for any of the drugs. The 90% CIs for AUCT, AUCI, Cmax, AUCOverttmax, and Cmax/AUCI were within the bioequivalence range, except for ibuprofen Cmax (76.66-98.99), ibuprofen Cmax/AUCI (77.19-98.39), and ibuprofen (45.32-91.62) and paracetamol (51.45-98.96) AUCOverttmax. Out of the 126 individual covert/overt ratios, 2.0-16.7% were outside the +25% range for AUCT, 2.0-4.2% for AUCI, 25.0-44.9% for Cmax, 67.3-76.7% for AUCOverttmax, and 45.8-71.4% for Tmax.This study couldn't confirm that awareness of drug ingestion modulates its bioavailability. However, it demonstrates the trivial effect of blinding in bioequivalence studies and the extent of bio-variability that would be expected when comparing a drug product to itself.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01501747 (registered Dec 26, 2011).

Project description:Attempts to develop a drug treatment for female sexual interest/arousal disorder have so far been guided by the principle of 'one size fits all', and have failed to acknowledge the complexity of female sexuality. Guided by personalized medicine, we designed two on-demand drugs targeting two distinct hypothesized causal mechanisms for this sexual disorder. The objective of this study was to design and test a novel procedure, based on genotyping, that predicts which of the two on-demand drugs will yield a positive treatment response. In a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled cross-over experiment, 139 women with female sexual interest/arousal disorder received three different on-demand drug-combination treatments during three 2-week periods: testosterone 0.5?mg?+?sildenafil 50?mg, testosterone 0.5?mg?+?buspirone 10?mg, and matching placebo. The primary endpoint was change in satisfactory sexual events. Subjects' genetic profile was assessed using a microarray chip that measures 300,000 single-nucleotide polymorphisms. A preselection of single-nucleotide polymorphisms associated with genes that are shown to be involved in sexual behaviour were combined into a Phenotype Prediction Score. The Phenotype Prediction Score demarcation formula was developed and subsequently validated on separate data sets. Prediction of drug-responders with the Phenotype Prediction Score demarcation formula gave large effect sizes (d?=?0.66 through 1.06) in the true drug-responders, and medium effect sizes (d?=?0.51 and d?=?0.47) in all patients (including identified double, and non-responders). Accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the Phenotype Prediction Score demarcation formula were all between 0.78 and 0.79, and thus sufficient. The resulting Phenotype Prediction Score was validated and shown to effectively and reliably predict which women would benefit from which on-demand drug, and could therefore also be useful in clinical practice, as a companion diagnostic establishing the way to a true personalized medicine approach.

Dataset Information

Interaction between drug and placebo effects: a cross-over balanced placebo design trial.

Publications

Interaction between drug and placebo effects: a cross-over balanced placebo design trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets