Dataset Information

A phase I randomized placebo controlled trial of the safety of 3% SPL7013 Gel (VivaGel®) in healthy young women administered twice daily for 14 days.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To assess the safety of VivaGel® used vaginally twice daily for 14 days among healthy, sexually-abstinent women, aged 18-24 years in the USA and Kenya.

Design

Randomized placebo controlled trial.

Methods

Participants were randomized 2?1, VivaGel to placebo. Safety was assessed by comparing genitourinary (GU) adverse events (AEs), colposcopy findings, vaginal lactobacilli and laboratory abnormalities by arm.

Results

Fifty-four women were enrolled; 35 in the VivaGel arm and 19 in the placebo arm. Twenty-six (74%) and 10 (53%) women reported taking all doses of VivaGel and placebo, respectively. No grade 3 or 4 AEs, or serious AEs occurred. Twenty-five (71%) participants in the VivaGel arm compared to 10 (53%) participants in the placebo arm had at least one grade 1 or 2 GU AE associated with product use (RR?=?1.4, 95% CI 0.8-2.2). All seven grade 2 GU AEs associated with product use occurred among four women in the VivaGel arm. Vulvar and cervical erythema, cervical lesions, symptomatic BV, urinary frequency and metrorrhagia were more common in the VivaGel arm than the placebo arm. Twenty-nine (83%) participants in the VivaGel arm had a colposcopic finding compared to 10 (53%) participants in the placebo arm (RR?=?1.6, 95%CI?=?1.0-2.5). Two women in the VivaGel arm prematurely discontinued product use themselves due to a reported GU AE. Persistence of H?O?-producing and non-producing lactobacilli did not differ by study arm.

Conclusions

GU AEs and colposcopic findings consistent with mild epithelial irritation and inflammation occurred more commonly among women in the VivaGel arm.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT003311032.

SUBMITTER: Cohen CR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3024437 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A phase I randomized placebo controlled trial of the safety of 3% SPL7013 Gel (VivaGel®) in healthy young women administered twice daily for 14 days.

Cohen Craig R CR Brown Joelle J Moscicki Anna-Barbara AB Bukusi Elizabeth A EA Paull Jeremy R A JR Price Clare F CF Shiboski Stephen S

PloS one 20110120 1

<h4>Objective</h4>To assess the safety of VivaGel® used vaginally twice daily for 14 days among healthy, sexually-abstinent women, aged 18-24 years in the USA and Kenya.<h4>Design</h4>Randomized placebo controlled trial.<h4>Methods</h4>Participants were randomized 2∶1, VivaGel to placebo. Safety was assessed by comparing genitourinary (GU) adverse events (AEs), colposcopy findings, vaginal lactobacilli and laboratory abnormalities by arm.<h4>Results</h4>Fifty-four women were enrolled; 35 in the ...[more]

PMID: 21311578

Similar Datasets

Project description:Tiotropium + olodaterol has demonstrated improvements beyond lung function benefits in a large Phase III clinical program as a once-daily maintenance treatment for COPD and may be a potential option for the initiation of maintenance treatment in COPD. Despite guideline recommendations that combined long-acting ?2-agonists and inhaled corticosteroids should only be used in individuals at high risk of exacerbation, there is substantial use in individuals at lower risk. This raises the question of the comparative effectiveness of this combination as maintenance treatment in this group compared to other combination regimens.The study aimed to assess the effect on lung function of once-daily tiotropium + olodaterol versus twice-daily salmeterol + fluticasone propionate in all participants with Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease 2 or 3 (moderate to severe) COPD.This was a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, four-treatment, complete crossover study in which participants received once-daily tiotropium + olodaterol (5/5 µg and 2.5/5 µg) via Respimat(®) and twice-daily salmeterol + fluticasone propionate (50/500 µg and 50/250 µg) via Accuhaler(®) for 6 weeks. The primary end point was change in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) area under the curve from 0 hour to 12 hours (AUC0-12) relative to the baseline after 6 weeks.Tiotropium + olodaterol 5/5 µg and 2.5/5 µg demonstrated statistically significant improvements in FEV1 AUC0-12 compared to salmeterol + fluticasone propionate (improvements from baseline were 317 mL and 295 mL with tiotropium + olodaterol 5/5 µg and 2.5/5 µg, and 188 mL and 192 mL with salmeterol + fluticasone propionate 50/500 µg and 50/250 µg, respectively). Tiotropium + olodaterol was superior to salmeterol + fluticasone propionate in lung function secondary end points, including FEV1 area under the curve from 0 hour to 24 hours (AUC0-24).Once-daily tiotropium + olodaterol in participants with moderate-to-severe COPD provided superior lung function improvements to twice-daily salmeterol + fluticasone propionate. Dual bronchodilation can be considered to optimize lung function in individuals requiring maintenance treatment for COPD.

Project description:BackgroundAcidform gel, an acid-buffering product that inactivates spermatozoa, may be an effective topical non-hormonal contraceptive. This study was designed to evaluate the safety of vaginal dosing and effects of Acidform on mucosal immune mediators, antimicrobial properties of genital secretions, and vaginal microbiota.MethodsThirty-six sexually abstinent U.S. women were randomized to apply Acidform or hydroxyethylcellulose (HEC) placebo gel twice daily for 14 consecutive days. Safety was assessed by symptoms and pelvic examination. The impact of gel on mucosal immunity was assessed by quantifying cytokines, chemokines, antimicrobial proteins and antimicrobial activity of genital secretions collected by cervicovaginal lavage (CVL) at screening, 2 hours after gel application, and on days 7, 14 and 21. Vaginal microbiota was characterized at enrollment and day 14 using species-specific quantitative PCR assays.ResultsThe median vaginal and cervical pH was significantly lower 2 hours after application of Acidform and was associated with an increase in the bactericidal activity of CVL against E. coli. However, 65% of women who received Acidform had at least one local adverse event compared with 11% who received placebo (p?=?0.002). While there was no increase in inflammatory cytokines or chemokines, CVL concentrations of lactoferrin and interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1ra), an anti-inflammatory protein, were significantly lower following Acidform compared to HEC placebo gel application. There were no significant changes in Lactobacillus crispatus or Lactobacillus jensenii in either group but there was a decrease in Gardnerella vaginalis in the Acidform group (p?=?0.08).ConclusionsAcidform gel may augment mucosal defense as evidenced by an increase in bactericidal activity of genital secretions against E. coli and a decrease in Gardnerella vaginalis colonization. However, Acidform was associated with more irritation than placebo and lower levels of antimicrobial (lactoferrin) and anti-inflammatory (IL-1ra) proteins. These findings indicate the need for additional safety studies of this candidate non-hormonal contraceptive.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00850837.

Project description:BackgroundDiclofenac diethylamine (DDEA) gel has demonstrated efficacy for treatment of ankle sprains in both the 1.16% four-times-daily (QID) and 2.32% twice-daily (BID) formulations. The objective of this study was to compare, for the first time, the efficacy of DDEA 2.32% gel BID and DDEA 1.16% gel QID.MethodsThis was a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, multicenter, active-controlled, parallel-group study conducted in China from October 2019 to November 2020, designed to determine the noninferiority of DDEA 2.32% gel BID relative to DDEA 1.16% gel QID for treatment of grade I-II ankle sprain. At study entry, patients must have had pain on movement (POM) ≥50 mm on a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS), and not received any pain medication. The primary efficacy endpoint was the noninferiority of DDEA 2.32% gel BID vs DDEA 1.16% gel QID for POM as assessed by the patient using the 100-mm VAS, conducted on day 5. Secondary endpoints included measures of ankle tenderness, joint function, swelling, and patient-reported pain intensity and pain relief.ResultsA total of 302 patients were randomized and 95.4% completed the study. The mean (SD) change in POM from baseline to day 5 using the 100-mm VAS was - 42.8 mm (19.7 mm) with DDEA 2.32% gel BID and - 43.1 mm (18.1 mm) with DDEA 1.16% gel QID for the per-protocol population. The least squares mean difference (DDEA gel 2.32% - DDEA gel 1.16%) at this timepoint was 1.11 mm (95% CI - 3.00, 5.22; P = 0.595), and the upper limit (5.22 mm) of the 95% CI was less than the noninferiority margin of 13 mm, demonstrating that DDEA 2.32% gel BID was noninferior to DDEA 1.16% gel QID. Similar trends were seen for the secondary efficacy endpoints. There was no significant difference in the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events or adverse events adjudicated as being treatment related. All treatment-related adverse events were dermatological; one patient discontinued from the DDEA 2.32% gel BID arm due to application-site inflammation.ConclusionsDDEA 2.32% gel BID offers a convenient alternative to DDEA 1.16% gel QID, with similar pain reduction and relief, anti-inflammatory effects, and tolerability.Trial registrationNCT04052620.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Umeclidinium bromide (UMEC) is an inhaled long-acting muscarinic antagonist in development for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). METHODS:This was a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, three-way cross-over, incomplete block study to evaluate UMEC 15.6, 31.25, 62.5, and 125 ?g administered once daily (QD), and UMEC 15.6 ?g and 31.25 ?g administered twice daily (BID), over 7 days in patients with COPD. Tiotropium was included as an open-label treatment arm. The primary efficacy endpoint was trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) on Day 8. Secondary efficacy endpoints included weighted mean FEV1 over 0-24 hours after morning dosing on Day 7, and serial FEV1 at each time point over 24 hours after morning dosing on Day 7. Safety and pharmacokinetics were also examined. RESULTS:One hundred and sixty-three patients (mean age 59.5 years, 52% female) were randomised. Based on the population dose-response model of trough FEV1 data, the geometric mean potency (ED50) of UMEC was 37 ?g (95% confidence interval [CI]: 18, 57) with a predicted maximum intrinsic efficacy (Emax) at trough of 0.185 L (95% CI: 0.153, 0.218) after QD dosing. UMEC 125 ?g QD demonstrated the greatest improvements in measure of lung function compared with doses of 62.5 ?g and below. UMEC 125 ?g QD exhibited more consistent increases in FEV1 from baseline across serial time points over 24 hours compared with other UMEC doses and tiotropium. Increases in FEV1 over 0-12 hours were similar to those observed over 12-24 hours after the second dose of UMEC was administered. UMEC was rapidly absorbed following inhaled dosing and eliminated from plasma. Adverse events, generally mild, were highest with UMEC 125 ?g QD (18%) compared with placebo (8%), tiotropium (4%) and other UMEC doses (5-12%). CONCLUSIONS:UMEC is a potent QD bronchodilator with geometric mean ED50 of 37 ?g. A dose ordering over the range of UMEC 15.6-125 ?g QD doses was observed, with UMEC 125 ?g showing the greatest improvement in trough FEV1.

Dataset Information

A phase I randomized placebo controlled trial of the safety of 3% SPL7013 Gel (VivaGel®) in healthy young women administered twice daily for 14 days.

Objective

Design

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration

Publications

A phase I randomized placebo controlled trial of the safety of 3% SPL7013 Gel (VivaGel®) in healthy young women administered twice daily for 14 days.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets