Dataset Information

The benefit of minocycline on negative symptoms of schizophrenia in patients with recent-onset psychosis (BeneMin): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The antibiotic minocycline has neuroprotective and anti-inflammatory properties that could prevent or reverse progressive neuropathic changes implicated in recent-onset schizophrenia. In the BeneMin study, we aimed to replicate the benefit of minocycline on negative symptoms reported in previous pilot studies, and to understand the mechanisms involved.

Methods

In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we recruited people with a schizophrenia-spectrum disorder that had begun within the past 5 years with continuing positive symptoms from 12 National Health Service (NHS) trusts. Participants were randomly assigned according to an automated permuted blocks algorithm, stratified by pharmacy, to receive minocycline (200 mg per day for 2 weeks, then 300 mg per day for the remainder of the 12-month study period) or matching placebo, which were added to their continuing treatment. The primary clinical outcome was the negative symptom subscale score of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scales (PANSS) across follow-ups at months 2, 6, 9, and 12. The primary biomarker outcomes were medial prefrontal grey-matter volume, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex activation during a working memory task, and plasma concentration of interleukin 6. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN49141214, and the EU Clinical Trials register (EudraCT) number is 2010-022463-35I.

Findings

Between April 16, 2013, and April 30, 2015, we recruited 207 people and randomly assigned them to receive minocycline (n=104) or placebo (n=103). Compared with placebo, the addition of minocycline had no effect on ratings of negative symptoms (treatment effect difference -0·19, 95% CI -1·23 to 0·85; p=0·73). The primary biomarker outcomes did not change over time and were not affected by minocycline. The groups did not differ in the rate of serious adverse events (n=11 in placebo group and n=18 in the minocycline group), which were mostly due to admissions for worsening psychiatric state (n=10 in the placebo group and n=15 in the minocycline group). The most common adverse events were gastrointestinal (n=12 in the placebo group, n=19 in the minocycline group), psychiatric (n=16 in placebo group, n=8 in minocycline group), nervous system (n=8 in the placebo group, n=12 in the minocycline group), and dermatological (n=10 in the placebo group, n=8 in the minocycline group).

Interpretation

Minocycline does not benefit negative or other symptoms of schizophrenia over and above adherence to routine clinical care in first-episode psychosis. There was no evidence of a persistent progressive neuropathic or inflammatory process underpinning negative symptoms. Further trials of minocycline in early psychosis are not warranted until there is clear evidence of an inflammatory process, such as microgliosis, against which minocycline has known efficacy.

Funding

National Institute for Health Research Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation (EME) programme, an MRC and NIHR partnership.

SUBMITTER: Deakin B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6206257 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Schizophrenia is understood to be a heterogeneous brain condition with overlapping symptom dimensions. The negative symptom dimension, with its protean cognitive manifestations, responds poorly to treatment, which can be a particular challenge in countries where clozapine therapy is not available. Preliminary data indicate that minocycline may be beneficial adjunct in the treatment of schizophrenia: positive, negative, and cognitive symptoms.In this study we aim to assess the efficacy of adjunctive minocycline to alleviate symptoms of schizophrenia in patients who have failed to respond to a therapeutic trial of antipsychotic medications.The study is a parallel group, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Participants will be adults (aged 18 years and above) with first episode or relapse episode of schizophrenia of under 5 years' duration. Patients who failed to show adequate therapeutic response to at least one antipsychotic medication given for a minimum of 4 weeks will be recruited from a psychiatry hospital in Addis Ababa and a psychiatry clinic in Butajira, Ethiopia. A total of 150 participants (75 in each arm) will be required to detect a five-point mean difference between the intervention arms adjusting for baseline symptom severity, at 90% power and 95% confidence. Patients in the intervention arm will receive minocycline (200 mg/day orally) added on to the regular antipsychotic medications participants are already on. Those in the placebo arm will receive an inactive compound identical in physical appearance to minocycline. Intervention will be offered for 12 weeks. Diagnosis will be established using the operational criteria for research (OPCRIT). Primary outcome measure will be a change in symptom severity measured using the positive and the negative syndrome scale for schizophrenia (PANSS). Secondary outcome measures will include changes in severity of negative symptoms, proportion achieving remission, and level of functioning. Whether changes are maintained post intervention will also be measured (PANSS). Key assessment for the primary outcome will be conducted at the end of trial (week 12). One post-intervention assessment will be conducted 4 weeks after the end of intervention (week 16) to determine sustainability of change.Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01809158.

Project description:BackgroundVery late (aged ≥60 years) onset schizophrenia-like psychosis occurs frequently but no placebo-controlled, randomised trials have assessed the efficacy and risks of antipsychotic treatment. We investigated whether low-dose amisulpride (100 mg daily) is superior to placebo in reducing psychosis symptoms over 12 weeks and whether any benefit is maintained by continuing treatment after 12 weeks.MethodsThe ATLAS double-blind controlled trial enrolled participants from 25 old age psychiatry services in the UK. Eligible participants (ie, those with a diagnosis of very late-onset schizophrenia-like psychosis and a Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale [BPRS] score of ≥30, without cognitive impairment) were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to one of three groups in a two-stage trial: amisulpride in stage 1 and 2 (group A), amisulpride then placebo (group B), or placebo then amisulpride (group C). Treatment (100 mg oral amisulpride daily vs placebo) was given for 12 weeks in stage 1 and, initially, 24 weeks then reduced to 12 weeks in stage 2. Participants, investigators, and outcome assessors were masked to treatment allocation. Primary outcomes were psychosis symptoms assessed by the BPRS at 4, 12, and 24, or 36 weeks, and trial treatment discontinuation for non-efficacy. The primary, secondary, and safety endpoints were all analysed in participants given at least one dose of study treatment in modified intention-to-treat analyses. This study is registered with EudraCT, number 2010-022184-35, and ISRCTN, number ISRCTN45593573.FindingsBetween Sept 27, 2012, and June 28, 2016, we recruited 101 participants. 92 (91%) of 101 participants took trial medication, of whom 59 (64%) completed stage 1 and 34 (58%) of these 59 participants completed stage 2 treatment. Despite suboptimal compliance, improvements in BPRS scores at 12 weeks were 7·7 points (95% CI 3·8-11·5, p=0·0002) greater with amisulpride (mean 11·9 points [SE 1·3]) than with placebo (4·2 points [1·0]). In stage 2, BPRS scores improved by a mean of 1·1 points (1·6) from 12 weeks to the final assessment in those who continued amisulpride but deteriorated by 5·2 points (2·0) in those who switched from amisulpride to placebo (difference 6·3 points [95% CI 0·9-11·7], p=0·024). Fewer participants who were allocated amisulpride than placebo stopped treatment because of non-efficacy in stage 1 (p=0·010) and stage 2 (p=0·031). Serious adverse events were reported more frequently in the amisulpride group than in the placebo group in stage 1 (p=0·057) and stage 2 (p=0·19). The most common serious adverse events were infection (five patients in the amisulpride group, three in the placebo group) and extrapyramidal side-effects (three patients in the amisulpride group, none in the placebo group). Five patients died during the study, one from a gastric ulcer bleed before treatment started (group B), two while taking stage 2 treatment (one in group A and one in group C), and two who stopped trial treatment in stage 1 and died many weeks later (one in group B and one in group C). No deaths were related to treatment.InterpretationLow-dose amisulpride is effective and well tolerated as a treatment for very late-onset schizophrenia-like psychosis, with benefits maintained by prolonging treatment.FundingUK National Institute for Health Research.

Project description:BackgroundInnate immunity contributes to the pathogenesis of autoimmune diseases, such as type 1 diabetes, but until now no randomised, controlled trials of blockade of the key innate immune mediator interleukin-1 have been done. We aimed to assess whether canakinumab, a human monoclonal anti-interleukin-1 antibody, or anakinra, a human interleukin-1 receptor antagonist, improved β-cell function in recent-onset type 1 diabetes.MethodsWe did two randomised, placebo-controlled trials in two groups of patients with recent-onset type 1 diabetes and mixed-meal-tolerance-test-stimulated C peptide of at least 0·2 nM. Patients in the canakinumab trial were aged 6-45 years and those in the anakinra trial were aged 18-35 years. Patients in the canakinumab trial were enrolled at 12 sites in the USA and Canada and those in the anakinra trial were enrolled at 14 sites across Europe. Participants were randomly assigned by computer-generated blocked randomisation to subcutaneous injection of either 2 mg/kg (maximum 300 mg) canakinumab or placebo monthly for 12 months or 100 mg anakinra or placebo daily for 9 months. Participants and carers were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was baseline-adjusted 2-h area under curve C-peptide response to the mixed meal tolerance test at 12 months (canakinumab trial) and 9 months (anakinra trial). Analyses were by intention to treat. These studies are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT00947427 and NCT00711503, and EudraCT number 2007-007146-34.FindingsPatients were enrolled in the canakinumab trial between Nov 12, 2010, and April 11, 2011, and in the anakinra trial between Jan 26, 2009, and May 25, 2011. 69 patients were randomly assigned to canakinumab (n=47) or placebo (n=22) monthly for 12 months and 69 were randomly assigned to anakinra (n=35) or placebo (n=34) daily for 9 months. No interim analyses were done. 45 canakinumab-treated and 21 placebo-treated patients in the canakinumab trial and 25 anakinra-treated and 26 placebo-treated patients in the anakinra trial were included in the primary analyses. The difference in C peptide area under curve between the canakinumab and placebo groups at 12 months was 0·01 nmol/L (95% CI -0·11 to 0·14; p=0·86), and between the anakinra and the placebo groups at 9 months was 0·02 nmol/L (-0·09 to 0·15; p=0·71). The number and severity of adverse events did not differ between groups in the canakinumab trial. In the anakinra trial, patients in the anakinra group had significantly higher grades of adverse events than the placebo group (p=0·018), which was mainly because of a higher number of injection site reactions in the anakinra group.InterpretationCanakinumab and anakinra were safe but were not effective as single immunomodulatory drugs in recent-onset type 1 diabetes. Interleukin-1 blockade might be more effective in combination with treatments that target adaptive immunity in organ-specific autoimmune disorders.FundingNational Institutes of Health and Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation.

Project description:BackgroundThe immunopathogenesis of type 1 diabetes mellitus is associated with T-cell autoimmunity. To be fully active, immune T cells need a co-stimulatory signal in addition to the main antigen-driven signal. Abatacept modulates co-stimulation and prevents full T-cell activation. We evaluated the effect of abatacept in recent-onset type 1 diabetes.MethodsIn this multicentre, double-blind, randomised controlled trial, patients aged 6-45 years recently diagnosed with type 1 diabetes were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive abatacept (10 mg/kg, maximum 1000 mg per dose) or placebo infusions intravenously on days 1, 14, 28, and monthly for a total of 27 infusions over 2 years. Computer-generated permuted block randomisation was used, with a block size of 3 and stratified by participating site. Neither patients nor research personnel were aware of treatment assignments. The primary outcome was baseline-adjusted geometric mean 2-h area-under-the-curve (AUC) serum C-peptide concentration after a mixed-meal tolerance test at 2 years' follow-up. Analysis was by intention to treat for all patients for whom data were available. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00505375.Findings112 patients were assigned to treatment groups (77 abatacept, 35 placebo). Adjusted C-peptide AUC was 59% (95% CI 6·1-112) higher at 2 years with abatacept (n=73, 0·378 nmol/L) than with placebo (n=30, 0·238 nmol/L; p=0·0029). The difference between groups was present throughout the trial, with an estimated 9·6 months' delay (95% CI 3·47-15·6) in C-peptide reduction with abatacept. There were few infusion-related adverse events (36 reactions occurred in 17 [22%] patients on abatacept and 11 reactions in six [17%] on placebo). There was no increase in infections (32 [42%] patients on abatacept vs 15 [43%] on placebo) or neutropenia (seven [9%] vs five [14%]).InterpretationCo-stimulation modulation with abatacept slowed reduction in β-cell function over 2 years. The beneficial effect suggests that T-cell activation still occurs around the time of clinical diagnosis of type 1 diabetes. Yet, despite continued administration of abatacept over 24 months, the decrease in β-cell function with abatacept was parallel to that with placebo after 6 months of treatment, causing us to speculate that T-cell activation lessens with time. Further observation will establish whether the beneficial effect continues after cessation of abatacept infusions.FundingUS National Institutes of Health.