Dataset Information

A Randomized Controlled Double Blind Trial of Ciclosporin versus Prednisolone in the Management of Leprosy Patients with New Type 1 Reaction, in Ethiopia.

ABSTRACT: Leprosy Type 1 (T1R) reactions are immune-mediated events leading to nerve damage and preventable disability affecting hands, feet and eyes. Type 1 Reactions are treated with oral corticosteroids. There is little evidence on alternative treatments for patients who do not respond to steroids or experience steroid adverse effects. We report the results of a randomized controlled trial testing the efficacy and adverse effect profile of ciclosporin and prednisolone (CnP) in comparison to prednisolone only (P) in patients with new T1R in Ethiopia. Ciclosporin is a potent immunosuppressant. Outcomes were measured using a clinical severity score, recurrence rate, adverse events and quality of life.Seventy three patients with new T1R were randomized to receive CnP or P for 20 weeks. Recovery rates in skin signs was similar in both groups (91% vs 88%). Improvements in nerve function both, new and old, sensory (66% vs 49%) and motor (75% vs 74%) loss were higher (but not significantly so) in the patients on CnP. Recurrences rates of T1R (85%) were high in both groups, and recurrences occurred significantly earlier (8 weeks) in patients CnP, who needed 10% more additional prednisolone. Serious major and minor adverse events rates were similar in patients in the two treatment arms of the study. Both groups had a significant improvement in their quality of life after the study, measured by the SF-36.This is the first double-blind RCT assessing ciclosporin, in the management of T1R in Africa. Ciclosporin could be a safe alternative second-line drug for patients with T1R who are not improving with prednisolone or are experiencing adverse events related to prednisolone. This study illustrates the difficulty in switching off leprosy inflammation. Better treatment agents for leprosy patients with reactions and nerve damage are needed.

SUBMITTER: Lambert SM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4821535 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A Randomized Controlled Double Blind Trial of Ciclosporin versus Prednisolone in the Management of Leprosy Patients with New Type 1 Reaction, in Ethiopia.

Lambert Saba M SM Alembo Digafe T DT Nigusse Shimelis D SD Yamuah Lawrence K LK Walker Stephen L SL Lockwood Diana N J DN

PLoS neglected tropical diseases 20160405 4

<h4>Background</h4>Leprosy Type 1 (T1R) reactions are immune-mediated events leading to nerve damage and preventable disability affecting hands, feet and eyes. Type 1 Reactions are treated with oral corticosteroids. There is little evidence on alternative treatments for patients who do not respond to steroids or experience steroid adverse effects. We report the results of a randomized controlled trial testing the efficacy and adverse effect profile of ciclosporin and prednisolone (CnP) in compar ...[more]

PMID: 27046330

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundErythema Nodosum Leprosum (ENL) is a serious complication of leprosy. It is normally treated with high dose steroids, but its recurrent nature leads to prolonged steroid usage and associated side effects. There is little evidence on the efficacy of alternative treatments for ENL, especially for patients who have become steroid resistant or have steroid side effects. These two pilot studies compare the efficacy and side effect profile of ciclosporin plus prednisolone against prednisolone alone in the treatment of patients with either new ENL or chronic and recurrent ENL.Methods and resultsThirteen patients with new ENL and twenty patients with chronic ENL were recruited into two double-blinded randomised controlled trials. Patients were randomised to receive ciclosporin and prednisolone or prednisolone treatment only. Patients with acute ENL had a delay of 16 weeks in the occurrence of ENL flare-up episode, with less severe flare-ups and decreased requirements for additional prednisolone. Patients with chronic ENL on ciclosporin had the first episode of ENL flare-up 4 weeks earlier than those on prednisolone, as well as more severe ENL flare-ups requiring 2.5 times more additional prednisolone. Adverse events attributable to prednisolone were more common that those attributable to ciclosporin.ConclusionsThis is the first clinical trial on ENL management set in the African context, and also the first trial in leprosy to use patients' assessment of outcomes. Patients on ciclosporin showed promising results in the management of acute ENL in this small pilot study. But ciclosporin, did not appear to have a significant steroid-sparing effects in patients with chronic ENL, which may have been due to the prolonged use of steroids in these patients in combination with a too rapid decrease of steroids in patients given ciclosporin. Further research is needed to determine whether the promising results of ciclosporin in acute ENL can be reproduced on a larger scale.

Project description:BackgroundPyoderma gangrenosum (PG) is a rare inflammatory skin disorder characterised by painful and rapidly progressing skin ulceration. PG can be extremely difficult to treat and patients often require systemic immunosuppression. Recurrent lesions of PG are common, but the relative rarity of this condition means that there is a lack of published evidence regarding its treatment. A systematic review published in 2005 found no randomised controlled trials (RCTs) relating to the treatment of PG. Since this time, one small RCT has been published comparing infliximab to placebo, but none of the commonly used systemic treatments for PG have been formally assessed. The UK Dermatology Clinical Trials Network's STOP GAP Trial has been designed to address this lack of trial evidence.MethodsThe objective is to assess whether oral ciclosporin is more effective than oral prednisolone for the treatment of PG. The trial design is a two-arm, observer-blind, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial comparing ciclosporin (4 mg/kg/day) to prednisolone (0.75 mg/kg/day). A total of 140 participants are to be recruited over a period of 4 years, from up to 50 hospitals in the UK and Eire. Primary outcome of velocity of healing at 6 weeks is assessed blinded to treatment allocation (using digital images of the ulcers). Secondary outcomes include: (i) time to healing; (ii) global assessment of improvement; (iii) PG inflammation assessment scale score; (iv) self-reported pain; (v) health-related quality of life; (vi) time to recurrence; (vii) treatment failures; (viii) adverse reactions to study medications; and (ix) cost effectiveness/utility. Patients with a clinical diagnosis of PG (excluding granulomatous PG); measurable ulceration (that is, not pustular PG); and patients aged over 18 years old who are able to give informed consent are included in the trial. Randomisation is by computer generated code using permuted blocks of randomly varying size, stratified by lesion size, and presence or absence of underlying systemic disease (for example, rheumatoid arthritis).Patients who require topical therapy are asked to enter a parallel observational study (case series). If topical therapy fails and systemic therapy is required, participants are then considered for inclusion in the randomised trial.Trial registrationCurrent controlled trials: ISRCTN35898459. Eudract No.2008-008291-14.

Project description:BackgroundGout is the most common form of rheumatic disease in which monosodium urate crystals are deposited in the joints followed by acute inflammatory reactions. There are various approved drugs that can be prescribed for pain relief during an acute gout attack. However, to date, no direct comparison of efficacy of colchicine and prednisolone for the treatment of acute gout attacks has been investigated. Furthermore, the majority of previous research studies were not only conducted in tertiary centres but also excluded patients with common comorbidities due to contraindications to naproxen.MethodsThis pragmatic, prospective, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group, randomized, non-inferiority trial investigates whether prednisolone (intervention) is non-inferior to treatment with colchicine (active control) in patients with acute gout. Adult patients presenting with acute gout to their general practitioners in 60 practices across 3 university sites (Greifswald, Göttingen, and Würzburg) are eligible to participate in the study. Participants in the intervention group receive 30 mg prednisolone for 5 days. Those in the control group receive low-dose colchicine (day 1: 1.5 mg; days 2-5: 1 mg). The primary outcome is the absolute level of the most severe pain on day 3 (in the last 24 h) measured with an 11-item numerical rating scale. Day 0 is the day patients take their study medication for the first time. They are then asked to fill out a study diary the same time each day for pain quantification. Pain scores are used for comparison between the two medications. Secondary outcomes are average response to treatment, swelling, tenderness and physical function of the joint, patients' global assessment of treatment success, use of additional pain medication and non-pharmacological pain therapies. For safety reasons, potential side effects and course of systolic blood pressure are assessed.DiscussionThis trial will provide evidence on the effectiveness of pain reduction and side effects of colchicine and prednisolone in acute gout in primary care.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05698680 first posted on January 26, 2023 (retrospectively registered). URL of trial registry record: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05698680.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The anti-progesterone drug mifepristone and the prostaglandin misoprostol can be used to treat missed miscarriage. However, it is unclear whether a combination of mifepristone and misoprostol is more effective than administering misoprostol alone. We investigated whether treatment with mifepristone plus misoprostol would result in a higher rate of completion of missed miscarriage compared with misoprostol alone. METHODS:MifeMiso was a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised trial in 28 UK hospitals. Women were eligible for enrolment if they were aged 16 years and older, diagnosed with a missed miscarriage by pelvic ultrasound scan in the first 14 weeks of pregnancy, chose to have medical management of miscarriage, and were willing and able to give informed consent. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to a single dose of oral mifepristone 200 mg or an oral placebo tablet, both followed by a single dose of vaginal, oral, or sublingual misoprostol 800 ?g 2 days later. Randomisation was managed via a secure web-based randomisation program, with minimisation to balance study group assignments according to maternal age (<30 years vs ?30 years), body-mass index (<35 kg/m2vs ?35 kg/m2), previous parity (nulliparous women vs parous women), gestational age (<70 days vs ?70 days), amount of bleeding (Pictorial Blood Assessment Chart score; ?2 vs ?3), and randomising centre. Participants, clinicians, pharmacists, trial nurses, and midwives were masked to study group assignment throughout the trial. The primary outcome was failure to spontaneously pass the gestational sac within 7 days after random assignment. Primary analyses were done according to intention-to-treat principles. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN17405024. FINDINGS:Between Oct 3, 2017, and July 22, 2019, 2595 women were identified as being eligible for the MifeMiso trial. 711 women were randomly assigned to receive either mifepristone and misoprostol (357 women) or placebo and misoprostol (354 women). 696 (98%) of 711 women had available data for the primary outcome. 59 (17%) of 348 women in the mifepristone plus misoprostol group did not pass the gestational sac spontaneously within 7 days versus 82 (24%) of 348 women in the placebo plus misoprostol group (risk ratio [RR] 0·73, 95% CI 0·54-0·99; p=0·043). 62 (17%) of 355 women in the mifepristone plus misoprostol group required surgical intervention to complete the miscarriage versus 87 (25%) of 353 women in the placebo plus misoprostol group (0·71, 0·53-0·95; p=0·021). We found no difference in incidence of adverse events between the study groups. INTERPRETATION:Treatment with mifepristone plus misoprostol was more effective than misoprostol alone in the management of missed miscarriage. Women with missed miscarriage should be offered mifepristone pretreatment before misoprostol to increase the chance of successful miscarriage management, while reducing the need for miscarriage surgery. FUNDING:UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

Project description:IntroductionAcute kidney injury (AKI) after cardiac surgery is common and results in increased morbidity and mortality. One possible mechanism for AKI is ischaemia-reperfusion injury caused by the extracorporeal circulation (ECC), resulting in an opening of the mitochondrial permeability transition pore (mPTP) in the kidneys, which can lead to cell injury or cell death. Ciclosporin may block the opening of mPTP if administered before the ischaemia-reperfusion injury. We hypothesised that ciclosporin given before the start of ECC in cardiac surgery can decrease the degree of AKI.Methods and analysisCiclosporin to Protect Renal function In Cardiac Surgery (CiPRICS) study is an investigator-initiated double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, parallel design, single-centre study performed at a tertiary university hospital. The primary objective is to assess the safety and efficacy of ciclosporin to limit the degree of AKI in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting surgery. We aim to evaluate 150 patients with a preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate of 15-90 mL/min/1.73 m2. Study patients are randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive study drug 2.5 mg/kg ciclosporin or placebo as an intravenous injection after anaesthesia induction but before start of surgery. The primary end point consists of relative P-cystatin C changes from the preoperative day to postoperative day 3. The primary variable will be tested using an analysis of covariance method. Secondary end points include evaluation of P-creatinine and biomarkers of kidney, heart and brain injury.Ethics and disseminationThe trial is conducted in compliance with the current version of the Declaration of Helsinki and the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH) Good Clinical Practice guidelines E6 (R1) and was approved by the Regional Ethical Review Board, Lund and the Swedish Medical Products Agency (MPA). Written and oral informed consent is obtained before enrolment into the study.Trial registration numberNCT02397213; Pre-results.

Project description:BackgroundHIV-disease progression correlates with immune activation. Here we investigated whether corticosteroid treatment can attenuate HIV disease progression in antiretroviral-untreated patients.MethodsDouble-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial including 326 HIV-patients in a resource-limited setting in Tanzania (clinicaltrials.gov NCT01299948). Inclusion criteria were a CD4 count above 300 cells/μl, the absence of AIDS-defining symptoms and an ART-naïve therapy status. Study participants received 5 mg prednisolone per day or placebo for 2 years. Primary endpoint was time to progression to an AIDS-defining condition or to a CD4-count below 200 cells/μl.ResultsNo significant change in progression towards the primary endpoint was observed in the intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis (19 cases with prednisolone versus 28 cases with placebo, p = 0.1407). In a per-protocol (PP)-analysis, 13 versus 24 study participants progressed to the primary study endpoint (p = 0.0741). Secondary endpoints: Prednisolone-treatment decreased immune activation (sCD14, suPAR, CD38/HLA-DR/CD8+) and increased CD4-counts (+77.42 ± 5.70 cells/μl compared to -37.42 ± 10.77 cells/μl under placebo, p < 0.0001). Treatment with prednisolone was associated with a 3.2-fold increase in HIV viral load (p < 0.0001). In a post-hoc analysis stratifying for sex, females treated with prednisolone progressed significantly slower to the primary study endpoint than females treated with placebo (ITT-analysis: 11 versus 21 cases, p = 0.0567; PP-analysis: 5 versus 18 cases, p = 0.0051): No changes in disease progression were observed in men.ConclusionsThis study could not detect any significant effects of prednisolone on disease progression in antiretroviral-untreated HIV infection within the intent-to-treat population. However, significant effects were observed on CD4 counts, immune activation and HIV viral load. This study contributes to a better understanding of the role of immune activation in the pathogenesis of HIV infection.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01299948.

Dataset Information

A Randomized Controlled Double Blind Trial of Ciclosporin versus Prednisolone in the Management of Leprosy Patients with New Type 1 Reaction, in Ethiopia.

Publications

A Randomized Controlled Double Blind Trial of Ciclosporin versus Prednisolone in the Management of Leprosy Patients with New Type 1 Reaction, in Ethiopia.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets