Dataset Information

Multicentre, double-blind, crossover trial to identify the Optimal Pathway for TreatIng neurOpathic paiN in Diabetes Mellitus (OPTION-DM): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The number of people with diabetes is growing rapidly. Diabetes can cause nerve damage leading to severe pain in the feet, legs and hands, which is known as diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain (DPNP). In the UK, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommends amitriptyline, duloxetine, pregabalin or gabapentin as initial treatment for DPNP. If this is not effective, adding one of the other drugs in combination with the first is recommended. NICE points out that these recommendations are not based on robust evidence. The OPTION-DM randomised controlled trial has been designed to address this evidence deficit, with the aims of determining the most clinically beneficial, cost-effective and tolerated treatment pathway for patients with DPNP.

Methods/design

A multicentre, double-blind, centre-stratified, multi-period crossover study with equal allocation to sequences (1:1:1:1:1:1) of treatment pathways. Three hundred and ninety-two participants will be recruited from secondary care DPNP centres in the UK. There are three treatment pathways: amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin, pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline and duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin. All participants will receive all three pathways and randomisation will determine the order in which they are received. The primary outcome is the difference between 7-day average 24-h pain scores on an 11-point NRS scale measured during the final follow-up week of the treatment pathway. Secondary outcomes for efficacy, cost-effectiveness, safety, patient-perceived tolerability and subgroup analysis will be measured at week 6 and week 16 of each pathway.

Discussion

The study includes direct comparisons of the mainstay treatment for DPNP. This novel study is designed to examine treatment pathways and capture clinically relevant outcomes which will make the results generalisable to current clinical practice. The study will also provide information on health economic outcomes and will include a subgroup study to provide information on whether patient phenotypes predict response to treatment.

Trial registration

ISRCTN17545443 . Registered on 12 September 2016.

SUBMITTER: Selvarajah D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6196556 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Multicentre, double-blind, crossover trial to identify the Optimal Pathway for TreatIng neurOpathic paiN in Diabetes Mellitus (OPTION-DM): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Selvarajah Dinesh D Petrie Jennifer J White David D Julious Steven S Bortolami Oscar O Cooper Cindy C Bradburn Mike M Loban Amanda A Bowler Helen H Swaby Lizzie L Sutherland Katie K Tesfaye Solomon S

Trials 20181022 1

<h4>Background</h4>The number of people with diabetes is growing rapidly. Diabetes can cause nerve damage leading to severe pain in the feet, legs and hands, which is known as diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain (DPNP). In the UK, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommends amitriptyline, duloxetine, pregabalin or gabapentin as initial treatment for DPNP. If this is not effective, adding one of the other drugs in combination with the first is recommended. NICE points ...[more]

PMID: 30348206

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDiabetic peripheral neuropathic pain (DPNP) is common and often distressing. Most guidelines recommend amitriptyline, duloxetine, pregabalin, or gabapentin as initial analgesic treatment for DPNP, but there is little comparative evidence on which one is best or whether they should be combined. We aimed to assess the efficacy and tolerability of different combinations of first-line drugs for treatment of DPNP.MethodsOPTION-DM was a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, crossover trial in patients with DPNP with mean daily pain numerical rating scale (NRS) of 4 or higher (scale is 0-10) from 13 UK centres. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1:1:1), with a predetermined randomisation schedule stratified by site using permuted blocks of size six or 12, to receive one of six ordered sequences of the three treatment pathways: amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin (A-P), pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline (P-A), and duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin (D-P), each pathway lasting 16 weeks. Monotherapy was given for 6 weeks and was supplemented with the combination medication if there was suboptimal pain relief (NRS >3), reflecting current clinical practice. Both treatments were titrated towards maximum tolerated dose (75 mg per day for amitriptyline, 120 mg per day for duloxetine, and 600 mg per day for pregabalin). The primary outcome was the difference in 7-day average daily pain during the final week of each pathway. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN17545443.FindingsBetween Nov 14, 2017, and July 29, 2019, 252 patients were screened, 140 patients were randomly assigned, and 130 started a treatment pathway (with 84 completing at least two pathways) and were analysed for the primary outcome. The 7-day average NRS scores at week 16 decreased from a mean 6·6 (SD 1·5) at baseline to 3·3 (1·8) at week 16 in all three pathways. The mean difference was -0·1 (98·3% CI -0·5 to 0·3) for D-P versus A-P, -0·1 (-0·5 to 0·3) for P-A versus A-P, and 0·0 (-0·4 to 0·4) for P-A versus D-P, and thus not significant. Mean NRS reduction in patients on combination therapy was greater than in those who remained on monotherapy (1·0 [SD 1·3] vs 0·2 [1·5]). Adverse events were predictable for the monotherapies: we observed a significant increase in dizziness in the P-A pathway, nausea in the D-P pathway, and dry mouth in the A-P pathway.InterpretationTo our knowledge, this was the largest and longest ever, head-to-head, crossover neuropathic pain trial. We showed that all three treatment pathways and monotherapies had similar analgesic efficacy. Combination treatment was well tolerated and led to improved pain relief in patients with suboptimal pain control with a monotherapy.FundingNational Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme.

Project description:BackgroundIdiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a progressive disease that leads to lung scarring. Cough is reported by 85% of patients with IPF and can be a distressing symptom with a significant impact on patients' quality of life. There are no proven effective therapies for IPF-related cough. Whilst morphine is frequently used as a palliative agent for breathlessness in IPF, its effects on cough have never been tested. PAciFy Cough is a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial of morphine sulphate for the treatment of cough in IPF.MethodsWe will recruit 44 subjects with IPF prospectively from three interstitial lung disease units in the UK, namely the Royal Brompton Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust (MFT) and Aintree University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust. Patients will be randomised (1:1) to either placebo twice daily or morphine sulphate 5 mg twice daily for 14 days. They will then crossover after a 7-day washout period. The primary endpoint is the percent change in daytime cough frequency (coughs per hour) from baseline as assessed by objective cough monitoring at day 14 of treatment.DiscussionThis multicentre, randomised trial will assess the effect of opioids on cough counts and cough associated quality of life in IPF subjects. If proven to be an effective intervention, it represents a readily available treatment for patients.Trial registrationThe study was approved by the UK Medicines and Healthcare Regulatory Agency (Ref: CTA 21268/0224/001-0001 - EUDRACT 2019-003571-19 - Protocol Number RBH2019/001) on 08 April 2020, in compliance with the European Clinical Trials Directive and the Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) Regulations 2004 and its subsequent amendments. The study was provided with ethical approval by the London Brent Research Ethics Committee (Ref: 20/LO/0368) on 21 May 2020 and is registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04429516) on 12 June 2020, available at https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04429516.

Project description:IntroductionChronic neuropathic low back pain (CNLBP) is a debilitating condition in which established medical treatments seldom alleviate symptoms. Evidence demonstrates that high-frequency 10 kHz spinal cord stimulation (SCS) reduces pain and improves health-related quality of life in patients with failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS), but evidence of this effect is limited in individuals with CNLBP who have not had surgery. The aim of this multicentre randomised trial is to assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness of 10 kHz SCS for this population.MethodsThis is a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, sham-controlled trial with a parallel economic evaluation. A total of 96 patients with CNLBP who have not had spinal surgery will be implanted with an epidural lead and a sham lead outside the epidural space without a screening trial. Patients will be randomised 1:1 to 10 kHz SCS plus usual care (intervention group) or to sham 10 kHz SCS plus usual care (control group) after receiving the full implant. The SCS devices will be programmed identically using a cathodal cascade. Participants will use their handheld programmer to alter the intensity of the stimulation as per routine practice. The primary outcome will be a 7-day daily pain diary. Secondary outcomes include the Oswestry Disability Index, complications, EQ-5D-5 L, and health and social care costs. Outcomes will be assessed at baseline (pre-randomisation) and at 1 month, 3 months and 6 months after device activation. The primary analyses will compare primary and secondary outcomes between groups at 6 months, while adjusting for baseline outcome scores. Incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) will be calculated at 6 months and over the lifetime of the patient.DiscussionThe outcomes of this trial will inform clinical practice and healthcare policy on the role of high-frequency 10 kHz SCS for use in patients with CNLBP who have not had surgery.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov, NCT03470766. Registered on 20 March 2018.DisclaimerThe views expressed here are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health. The NIHR had no role in the study design, writing of the manuscript or the decision to submit for publication.Roles and responsibilitiesAK, SP, DP, SW, RST, AC, SE, LM, RD and JF all contributed to the trial design and to securing trial funding. AK, JR, SP, DP, and SE are involved in the recruitment, the intervention and the follow-up. SW will perform data collection and analysis. RST will be responsible for the statistical analysis, and RD will be responsible for the health economic analysis. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Project description:IntroductionA number of studies have established that children, adolescents and adults with Asperger syndrome (AS) and high functioning autism (HFA) have significant problems with anxiety. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is an effective treatment for anxiety in a variety of clinical populations. There is a growing interest in exploring the effectiveness of CBT for people with AS who have mental health problems, but currently there are no known clinical trials involving adults with AS or HFA. Studies with children who have AS have reported some success. The current study aims to examine whether modified group CBT for clinically significant anxiety in an AS population is likely to be efficacious.Methods and analysisThis study is a randomised, single-blind crossover trial. At least 36 individuals will be recruited and randomised into a treatment arm or a waiting-list control arm. During treatment, individuals will receive 3 sessions of individual CBT, followed by 21 sessions of group CBT. Primary outcome measures focus on anxiety. Secondary outcome measures focus on everyday social and psychiatric functioning, additional measures of anxiety and fear, depression, health-related quality of life and treatment cost. Assessments will be administered at pregroup and postgroup and at follow-up by researchers who are blinded to group allocation. The trial aims to find out whether or not psychological treatments for anxiety can be adapted and used to successfully treat the anxiety experienced by people with AS. Furthermore, we aim to determine whether this intervention represents good value for money.Ethics and disseminationThe trial received a favourable ethical opinion from a National Health Service (NHS) Research Ethics Committee. All participants provided written informed consent. Findings will be shared with all trial participants, and the general public, as well as the scientific community.Trial registrationISRCTN 30265294 (DOI: 10.1186/ISRCTN30265294), UKCRN 8370.

Project description:IntroductionBronchiolitis is an acute viral infection of the lower respiratory tract. It is most commonly caused by respiratory syncytial virus. Being a common reason for hospitalisation, it affects 13-17% of all hospitalised children younger than 2 years. Only supportive therapy, including suctioning nasal secretions, water-electrolyte balance maintenance and oxygen supplementation when needed, is recommended. However, non-evidence-based diagnostic and therapeutic approaches, including the use of inhaled bronchodilators, nebulised epinephrine, and nebulised and systemic steroids, are common. The inhalation of 3% hypertonic saline is not recommended in bronchiolitis management. However, a recently published meta-analysis revealed that the inhalation of hypertonic saline can reduce the risk of hospitalisation for outpatients with bronchiolitis, while resulting in a shorter length of hospital stay and reduced severity of respiratory distress for inpatients, although the evidence is of low certainty. We aim to assess the efficacy of nebulised hypertonic saline for the treatment of children hospitalised with bronchiolitis.Methods and analysisThis will be a randomised, double-blinded, parallel-group, controlled trial. Children younger than 2 years who are hospitalised due to bronchiolitis will be recruited from at least three paediatric departments in Poland. Bronchiolitis is defined as an apparent viral respiratory tract infection associated with airway obstruction that is manifested by at least one of following symptoms: tachypnoea, increased respiratory effort, crackles and/or wheezing. A total of 140 children will be randomised (1:1) to receive either hypertonic saline nebulisation (5 mL, three times a day) or normal saline at the same dose. The primary outcome measure will be the duration of hospitalisation.Ethics and disseminationThe Bioethics Committee of the Lower Silesia Medical Chamber in Wroclaw approved the study protocol (4/PNDR/2023). Caregivers will receive oral and written information about the study and written informed consent will be obtained by the study physicians. The findings of the study will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal, and abstracts will be submitted to relevant national and international conferences.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT06069336).

Project description:BackgroundOptimal drug treatment for patients with resistant hypertension is undefined. We aimed to test the hypotheses that resistant hypertension is most often caused by excessive sodium retention, and that spironolactone would therefore be superior to non-diuretic add-on drugs at lowering blood pressure.MethodsIn this double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial, we enrolled patients aged 18-79 years with seated clinic systolic blood pressure 140 mm Hg or greater (or ≥135 mm Hg for patients with diabetes) and home systolic blood pressure (18 readings over 4 days) 130 mm Hg or greater, despite treatment for at least 3 months with maximally tolerated doses of three drugs, from 12 secondary and two primary care sites in the UK. Patients rotated, in a preassigned, randomised order, through 12 weeks of once daily treatment with each of spironolactone (25-50 mg), bisoprolol (5-10 mg), doxazosin modified release (4-8 mg), and placebo, in addition to their baseline blood pressure drugs. Random assignment was done via a central computer system. Investigators and patients were masked to the identity of drugs, and to their sequence allocation. The dose was doubled after 6 weeks of each cycle. The hierarchical primary endpoints were the difference in averaged home systolic blood pressure between spironolactone and placebo, followed (if significant) by the difference in home systolic blood pressure between spironolactone and the average of the other two active drugs, followed by the difference in home systolic blood pressure between spironolactone and each of the other two drugs. Analysis was by intention to treat. The trial is registered with EudraCT number 2008-007149-30, and ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02369081.FindingsBetween May 15, 2009, and July 8, 2014, we screened 436 patients, of whom 335 were randomly assigned. After 21 were excluded, 285 patients received spironolactone, 282 doxazosin, 285 bisoprolol, and 274 placebo; 230 patients completed all treatment cycles. The average reduction in home systolic blood pressure by spironolactone was superior to placebo (-8·70 mm Hg [95% CI -9·72 to -7·69]; p<0·0001), superior to the mean of the other two active treatments (doxazosin and bisoprolol; -4·26 [-5·13 to -3·38]; p<0·0001), and superior when compared with the individual treatments; versus doxazosin (-4·03 [-5·04 to -3·02]; p<0·0001) and versus bisoprolol (-4·48 [-5·50 to -3·46]; p<0·0001). Spironolactone was the most effective blood pressure-lowering treatment, throughout the distribution of baseline plasma renin; but its margin of superiority and likelihood of being the best drug for the individual patient were many-fold greater in the lower than higher ends of the distribution. All treatments were well tolerated. In six of the 285 patients who received spironolactone, serum potassium exceeded 6·0 mmol/L on one occasion.InterpretationSpironolactone was the most effective add-on drug for the treatment of resistant hypertension. The superiority of spironolactone supports a primary role of sodium retention in this condition.FundingThe British Heart Foundation and National Institute for Health Research.

Dataset Information

Multicentre, double-blind, crossover trial to identify the Optimal Pathway for TreatIng neurOpathic paiN in Diabetes Mellitus (OPTION-DM): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Background

Methods/design

Discussion

Trial registration

Publications

Multicentre, double-blind, crossover trial to identify the Optimal Pathway for TreatIng neurOpathic paiN in Diabetes Mellitus (OPTION-DM): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets