Dataset Information

KM110329 in adult patients with atopic dermatitis: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial--study protocol.

ABSTRACT: Atopic dermatitis is a chronic inflammatory skin disease with a high prevalence rate and a large socioeconomic cost. There are many treatments for atopic dermatitis, such as antihistamine, tacrolimus and corticosteroids. However, due to concern about the adverse effects, many patients seek alternative treatments. In this context, natural products are gaining interest. KM110329 is a functional food consisting of four herbs that are beneficial to skin health. The purpose of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of KM110329 for atopic dermatitis.This study is a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled and multicentre trial of KM110329. For this study, we will recruit 66 atopic dermatitis patients of both sexes, with ages ranging from 18 to 65, from three university hospitals. The participants will receive either KM110329 or a placebo twice a day for 8 weeks. The primary end point will be a change in the scoring atopic dermatitis (SCORAD) index. The secondary end points will include changes to the dermatology life quality index (DLQI) and transepidermal water loss (TEWL), among others. The outcomes will be measured at every visit. The study will be continued for 8 weeks and will include five visits with each subject (at screening and at 0, 1, 4 and 8 weeks).This trial will provide research methodologies for evaluate clinical efficacy and safety of KM110329 in adult patients with atopic dermatitis. In addition, we will evaluate the changes in the general skin health status and quality of life.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01692093.

SUBMITTER: Cheon C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4222770 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

KM110329 in adult patients with atopic dermatitis: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial--study protocol.

Cheon Chunhoo C Park Sunju S Park Jeong-Su JS Oh So-Mi SM Jang Soobin S Go Ho-Yeon HY Jang Bo-Hyoung BH Shin Yong-Cheol YC Ko Seong-Gyu SG

BMC complementary and alternative medicine 20131127

<h4>Background</h4>Atopic dermatitis is a chronic inflammatory skin disease with a high prevalence rate and a large socioeconomic cost. There are many treatments for atopic dermatitis, such as antihistamine, tacrolimus and corticosteroids. However, due to concern about the adverse effects, many patients seek alternative treatments. In this context, natural products are gaining interest. KM110329 is a functional food consisting of four herbs that are beneficial to skin health. The purpose of this ...[more]

PMID: 24279519

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionPerianal fistula is a burdening disease with an annual incidence of 6-12/100 000 in Western countries. More than 90% of crypto-glandular fistulas originate from perianal abscess. Despite adequate drainage, up to 83% recur or result in an anal fistula, the majority developing within 12 months. There is some evidence that gut-derived bacteria play a role in the development of perianal fistula. Up till now, it is not common practice to routinely administer prophylactic antibiotics to prevent anal fistula development. There is a need for a study to establish whether adding antibiotic treatment to surgical drainage of perianal abscess results in a reduction in perianal fistulas.Methods and analysisThis multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial investigates whether addition of antibiotics (ciprofloxacin and metronidazole) to surgical drainage of a perianal abscess is beneficial compared with surgical drainage alone. The primary outcome is the development of a perianal fistula within 1 year. Secondary outcomes include quality of life, treatment costs, need for repeated drainage, patient-reported outcomes and other clinical outcomes. Participants are recruited in one academic and seven peripheral Dutch clinics. To demonstrate a reduction of perianal fistula from 30% to 15% when treated with adjuvant antibiotics with a two-sided alpha of 0.05, a power of 80% and taking a 10% loss to follow-up percentage into account, the total sample size will be 298 participants. Data will be analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle.Ethics and disseminationThe study protocol has been approved by the Medical Ethics Review Committee of the Amsterdam University Medical Centers (nr. 2021_010). Written consent is obtained from each participant prior to randomisation into the study. The results of this trial will be submitted for publication in international peer-reviewed journals, presented at conferences and spread to coloproctological associations.Trial registration numbers2020-004449-35; NCT05385887.

Project description:IntroductionAtopic dermatitis is a chronic, inflammatory skin rash that greatly affects quality of life. The current therapies are inadequate in managing atopic dermatitis and often have associated adverse effects or drug tolerance development. Chinese medicine is expected to have promising prospects in the management of atopic dermatitis and recent studies have shown encouraging results. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a newly formulated Chinese herbal formula, RMIT Chinese Medicine-106 (RCM-106), in the management of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis in children aged 6-18 years.MethodsThe study is a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-armed clinical trial. Participant, investigator and assessors will remain blinded to the treatment assignment until after the study has been completed. After a 2-week run-in period, 90 participants will be randomised, using block randomised sequences generated by computer, to receive either RCM-106 or matching placebo capsules, twice daily, for a treatment period of 8 weeks and followed up for 4 weeks. Primary outcome measures include the evaluation of disease severity and extent using two validated scoring instruments-Scoring Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) and Patient-Oriented Scoring Atopic Dermatitis (PO-SCORAD). Secondary outcome measures include the evaluation of quality of life using the Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI); occurrence of adverse events and total usage of other therapies as recorded in the participants' daily diary and laboratory studies which include eosinophil count, total IgE, full blood count and liver and kidney function tests. Intention-to-treat analysis will be applied to all data analyses.Ethics and disseminationThis trial has received human ethics approval from the Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) of RMIT University (Project number 15/12). The study findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at the national and international conferences.Trial registrationAustralia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Register (ANZCTR): ACTRN12612001181897. TGA CTN Scheme: Trial number 2012/0713; Protocol number 15/12.

Project description:IntroductionAtopic dermatitis (AD) is a heterogeneous disease, with involvement of the T-helper cell (Th) 2, Th22, and potentially Th17 pathways, supporting the use of interleukin (IL)-23 and IL-22 blockade in AD.MethodsThis phase 2, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (NCT03706040) evaluated the efficacy and safety of risankizumab, an IL-23 inhibitor, in patients (≥ 12 years old) with moderate-to-severe AD, defined by an Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) ≥ 16, affected body surface area ≥ 10%, and a Validated Investigator Global Assessment for AD (vIGA-AD) score ≥ 3. Patients were randomized 2:2:1 to 16-week treatment with risankizumab 150 mg, risankizumab 300 mg, or placebo in period A; patients receiving placebo were re-randomized 1:1 to risankizumab 150 mg or 300 mg and patients receiving risankizumab continued on their randomized dose in 36-week period B. Study drug was administered at baseline and weeks 4, 16, 28, and 40. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving a ≥ 75% reduction from baseline in EASI (EASI 75) at week 16. Safety was analyzed in all randomized patients who received study medication.ResultsNeither the risankizumab 150 mg (n = 69) nor the 300 mg dose group (n = 69) demonstrated a significantly higher proportion of patients achieving EASI 75 at week 16 compared with the placebo group (n = 34; treatment difference [95% CI] 13.0% [-1.7 to 27.7%; P = 0.084] and 10.0% [-4.6 to 24.6%; P = 0.179], respectively). Most adverse events were mild to moderate in severity; five patients receiving risankizumab reported serious adverse events, including two patients who reported cellulitis.ConclusionsRisankizumab was generally well tolerated, with no new safety concerns identified. The study's primary endpoint was not met, with no significant difference in the proportion of patients achieving an EASI 75 response at week 16 with risankizumab 150 mg or 300 mg versus placebo.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03706040.

Project description:BackgroundNo specific antiviral drug has been proven effective for treatment of patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Remdesivir (GS-5734), a nucleoside analogue prodrug, has inhibitory effects on pathogenic animal and human coronaviruses, including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in vitro, and inhibits Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, SARS-CoV-1, and SARS-CoV-2 replication in animal models.MethodsWe did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial at ten hospitals in Hubei, China. Eligible patients were adults (aged ?18 years) admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, with an interval from symptom onset to enrolment of 12 days or less, oxygen saturation of 94% or less on room air or a ratio of arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen of 300 mm Hg or less, and radiologically confirmed pneumonia. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to intravenous remdesivir (200 mg on day 1 followed by 100 mg on days 2-10 in single daily infusions) or the same volume of placebo infusions for 10 days. Patients were permitted concomitant use of lopinavir-ritonavir, interferons, and corticosteroids. The primary endpoint was time to clinical improvement up to day 28, defined as the time (in days) from randomisation to the point of a decline of two levels on a six-point ordinal scale of clinical status (from 1=discharged to 6=death) or discharged alive from hospital, whichever came first. Primary analysis was done in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and safety analysis was done in all patients who started their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04257656.FindingsBetween Feb 6, 2020, and March 12, 2020, 237 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to a treatment group (158 to remdesivir and 79 to placebo); one patient in the placebo group who withdrew after randomisation was not included in the ITT population. Remdesivir use was not associated with a difference in time to clinical improvement (hazard ratio 1·23 [95% CI 0·87-1·75]). Although not statistically significant, patients receiving remdesivir had a numerically faster time to clinical improvement than those receiving placebo among patients with symptom duration of 10 days or less (hazard ratio 1·52 [0·95-2·43]). Adverse events were reported in 102 (66%) of 155 remdesivir recipients versus 50 (64%) of 78 placebo recipients. Remdesivir was stopped early because of adverse events in 18 (12%) patients versus four (5%) patients who stopped placebo early.InterpretationIn this study of adult patients admitted to hospital for severe COVID-19, remdesivir was not associated with statistically significant clinical benefits. However, the numerical reduction in time to clinical improvement in those treated earlier requires confirmation in larger studies.FundingChinese Academy of Medical Sciences Emergency Project of COVID-19, National Key Research and Development Program of China, the Beijing Science and Technology Project.

Project description:BackgroundStaphylococcus aureus bacteraemia is a common cause of severe community-acquired and hospital-acquired infection worldwide. We tested the hypothesis that adjunctive rifampicin would reduce bacteriologically confirmed treatment failure or disease recurrence, or death, by enhancing early S aureus killing, sterilising infected foci and blood faster, and reducing risks of dissemination and metastatic infection.MethodsIn this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, adults (≥18 years) with S aureus bacteraemia who had received ≤96 h of active antibiotic therapy were recruited from 29 UK hospitals. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a computer-generated sequential randomisation list to receive 2 weeks of adjunctive rifampicin (600 mg or 900 mg per day according to weight, oral or intravenous) versus identical placebo, together with standard antibiotic therapy. Randomisation was stratified by centre. Patients, investigators, and those caring for the patients were masked to group allocation. The primary outcome was time to bacteriologically confirmed treatment failure or disease recurrence, or death (all-cause), from randomisation to 12 weeks, adjudicated by an independent review committee masked to the treatment. Analysis was intention to treat. This trial was registered, number ISRCTN37666216, and is closed to new participants.FindingsBetween Dec 10, 2012, and Oct 25, 2016, 758 eligible participants were randomly assigned: 370 to rifampicin and 388 to placebo. 485 (64%) participants had community-acquired S aureus infections, and 132 (17%) had nosocomial S aureus infections. 47 (6%) had meticillin-resistant infections. 301 (40%) participants had an initial deep infection focus. Standard antibiotics were given for 29 (IQR 18-45) days; 619 (82%) participants received flucloxacillin. By week 12, 62 (17%) of participants who received rifampicin versus 71 (18%) who received placebo experienced treatment failure or disease recurrence, or died (absolute risk difference -1·4%, 95% CI -7·0 to 4·3; hazard ratio 0·96, 0·68-1·35, p=0·81). From randomisation to 12 weeks, no evidence of differences in serious (p=0·17) or grade 3-4 (p=0·36) adverse events were observed; however, 63 (17%) participants in the rifampicin group versus 39 (10%) in the placebo group had antibiotic or trial drug-modifying adverse events (p=0·004), and 24 (6%) versus six (2%) had drug interactions (p=0·0005).InterpretationAdjunctive rifampicin provided no overall benefit over standard antibiotic therapy in adults with S aureus bacteraemia.FundingUK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment.

Project description:BackgroundMemantine has been used off-label to treat frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTD). A previous 26-week open-label study suggested a transient, modest benefit on neuropsychiatric symptoms as measured by the neuropsychiatric inventory (NPI). We aimed to determine whether memantine is an effective treatment for FTD.MethodsWe did a randomised, parallel group, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 20 mg memantine taken orally daily for 26 weeks in patients with FTD. Participants met Neary criteria for behavioural variant FTD (bvFTD) or semantic dementia and had characteristic brain atrophy. Use of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors was prohibited. Individuals were randomly assigned to receive either memantine or matched placebo tablets (1:1) in blocks of two and four patients. All patients and study personnel were masked to treatment assignment. Primary endpoints were the change in total NPI score and clinical global impression of change (CGIC) score after 26 weeks and were analysed by intention to treat. This study is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT00545974.FindingsOf 100 patients screened, 81 were randomly assigned to receive memantine (39 patients) or placebo (42 patients). Five (6%) patients discontinued, and 76 completed the 26-week treatment. Enrolment numbers were lower than planned because of many patients' preference to take memantine or cholinesterase inhibitors off-label rather than participate in a clinical trial. Memantine treatment had no effect on either the NPI (mean difference 2·2, 95% CI -3·9 to 8·3, p=0·47) or CGIC (mean difference 0·0, -0·4 to 0·4, p=0·90) after 26 weeks of treatment. Memantine was generally well tolerated; however, patients in the memantine group had more frequent cognitive adverse events (six patients) than those in the placebo group (one).InterpretationMemantine treatment showed no benefit in patients with FTD. These data do not support memantine use in FTD.FundingForest Research Institute.

Dataset Information

KM110329 in adult patients with atopic dermatitis: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial--study protocol.

Publications

KM110329 in adult patients with atopic dermatitis: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial--study protocol.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets