Dataset Information

Cannabidiol for the treatment of cannabis use disorder: a phase 2a, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, adaptive Bayesian trial.

ABSTRACT: Background A substantial and unmet clinical need exists for pharmacological treatment of cannabis use disorders. Cannabidiol could offer a novel treatment, but it is unclear which doses might be efficacious or safe. Therefore, we aimed to identify efficacious doses and eliminate inefficacious doses in a phase 2a trial using an adaptive Bayesian design.

Methods

We did a phase 2a, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, adaptive Bayesian trial at the Clinical Psychopharmacology Unit (University College London, London, UK). We used an adaptive Bayesian dose-finding design to identify efficacious or inefficacious doses at a-priori interim and final analysis stages. Participants meeting cannabis use disorder criteria from DSM-5 were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) in the first stage of the trial to 4-week treatment with three different doses of oral cannabidiol (200 mg, 400 mg, or 800 mg) or with matched placebo during a cessation attempt by use of a double-blinded block randomisation sequence. All participants received a brief psychological intervention of motivational interviewing. For the second stage of the trial, new participants were randomly assigned to placebo or doses deemed efficacious in the interim analysis. The primary objective was to identify the most efficacious dose of cannabidiol for reducing cannabis use. The primary endpoints were lower urinary 11-nor-9-carboxy-δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC-COOH):creatinine ratio, increased days per week with abstinence from cannabis during treatment, or both, evidenced by posterior probabilities that cannabidiol is better than placebo exceeding 0·9. All analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02044809) and the EU Clinical Trials Register (2013-000361-36).

Findings

Between May 28, 2014, and Aug 12, 2015 (first stage), 48 participants were randomly assigned to placebo (n=12) and to cannabidiol 200 mg (n=12), 400 mg (n=12), and 800 mg (n=12). At interim analysis, cannabidiol 200 mg was eliminated from the trial as an inefficacious dose. Between May 24, 2016, and Jan 12, 2017 (second stage), randomisation continued and an additional 34 participants were allocated (1:1:1) to cannabidiol 400 mg (n=12), cannabidiol 800 mg (n=11), and placebo (n=11). At final analysis, cannabidiol 400 mg and 800 mg exceeded primary endpoint criteria (0·9) for both primary outcomes. For urinary THC-COOH:creatinine ratio, the probability of being the most efficacious dose compared with placebo given the observed data was 0·9995 for cannabidiol 400 mg and 0·9965 for cannabidiol 800 mg. For days with abstinence from cannabis, the probability of being the most efficacious dose compared with placebo given the observed data was 0·9966 for cannabidiol 400 mg and 0·9247 for cannabidiol 800 mg. Compared with placebo, cannabidiol 400 mg decreased THC-COOH:creatinine ratio by -94·21 ng/mL (95% interval estimate -161·83 to -35·56) and increased abstinence from cannabis by 0·48 days per week (0·15 to 0·82). Compared with placebo, cannabidiol 800 mg decreased THC-COOH:creatinine ratio by -72·02 ng/mL (-135·47 to -19·52) and increased abstinence from cannabis by 0·27 days per week (-0·09 to 0·64). Cannabidiol was well tolerated, with no severe adverse events recorded, and 77 (94%) of 82 participants completed treatment.

Interpretation

In the first randomised clinical trial of cannabidiol for cannabis use disorder, cannabidiol 400 mg and 800 mg were safe and more efficacious than placebo at reducing cannabis use.

Funding

Medical Research Council.

SUBMITTER: Freeman TP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7116091 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:To identify dose(s) of lemborexant that maximize insomnia treatment efficacy while minimizing next-morning residual sleepiness and evaluate lemborexant effects on polysomnography (PSG) measures (sleep efficiency [SE], latency to persistent sleep [LPS], and wake after sleep onset [WASO]) at the beginning and end of treatment.Adults and elderly subjects with insomnia disorder per the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition were enrolled in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Bayesian, adaptive, parallel-group study, receiving lemborexant (1, 2.5, 5, 10, 15, 25 mg) or placebo for 15 nights. Efficacy assessments included a utility function that combined efficacy (SE) and safety (residual morning sleepiness as measured by Karolinska Sleepiness Scale [KSS]), PSG measures, and sleep diary. Safety assessments included KSS, Digit Symbol Substitution Test, computerized reaction time tests, and adverse events (AEs).A total of 616 subjects were screened; 291 were randomized. Baseline characteristics were similar between lemborexant groups and placebo (?63% female, median age: 49.0 years). The study was stopped for early success after the fifth interim analysis when the 15-mg dose met utility index/KSS criteria for success; 3 other doses also met the criteria. Compared with placebo, subjects showed significant improvements in SE, subjective SE, LPS, and subjective sleep onset latency at the beginning and end of treatment for lemborexant doses ? 5 mg (P < .05). WASO and subjective WASO showed numerically greater improvements for doses > 1 mg. AEs, mostly mild to moderate, included dose-related somnolence.Lemborexant doses ranging from 2.5-10 mg provided efficacy for the treatment of insomnia while minimizing next-morning residual sleepiness.Title: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Parallel-group, Bayesian Adaptive Randomization Design, Dose Response Study of the Efficacy of E2006 in Adults and Elderly Subjects With Chronic Insomnia; URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01995838; Identifier: NCT01995838.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is associated with eosinophilic airway inflammation in 10-20% of patients. Benralizumab, an anti-interleukin-5 receptor ? monoclonal antibody, depletes blood and sputum eosinophils. We aimed to establish whether benralizumab reduces acute exacerbations of COPD in patients with eosinophilia and COPD. METHODS:We did this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2a study between Nov 18, 2010, and July 13, 2013, at 26 sites in the UK, Poland, Germany, Canada, the USA, Denmark, and Spain. Adults aged 40-85 years, with moderate-to-severe COPD, at least one acute exacerbation of COPD, and a sputum eosinophil count of 3·0% or more within the previous year, were randomly assigned (1:1) via computer-generated permuted block randomisation (block size of four), with an interactive voice or web-response system, to receive placebo or 100 mg benralizumab subcutaneously, every 4 weeks (three doses), then every 8 weeks (five doses) over 48 weeks. Study site personnel included in study assessments, participants, and data analysts, were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was the annualised rate of acute exacerbations of COPD at week 56, defined as the number of acute exacerbations divided by total duration of person-year follow-up. Secondary and exploratory endpoints included COPD-specific Saint George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ-C), Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire self-administered standardised format (CRQ-SAS), pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), and safety. We did a prespecified subgroup analysis by baseline blood eosinophil count. Analyses were by intention to treat and per-protocol. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01227278. FINDINGS:We randomly assigned 101 patients to receive placebo (n=50) or benralizumab (n=51), of whom 88 (87%) patients completed the study. Six patients who completed the study were excluded from the per-protocol population because of major protocol violations; the per-protocol population thus included 82 patients. Benralizumab did not reduce the annualised rate of acute exacerbations of COPD compared with placebo in the per-protocol population, with rates of 0·95 (0·68-1·29; n=40) versus 0·92 (0·67-1·25; n=42). Mean pre-bronchodilator FEV1 change from baseline to week 56 was -0·06 L (SD 0·24) with placebo, and 0·13 L (0·41) with benralizumab (p=0·014). Numerical, albeit non-significant, improvement in acute exacerbations of COPD, SGRQ-C, CRQ-SAS, and FEV1 were greater in benralizumab-treated patients with baseline blood eosinophil concentrations of 200 cells per ?L or more or 300 cells per ?L or more. Incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar between the two groups, with the most common events being respiratory disorders (31 [62%] of 50 patients given placebo vs 32 [63%] of 51 given benralizumab) and infections (28 [56%] vs 27 [53%]). A higher incidence of serious treatment-emergent adverse events were recorded in patients in the benralizumab group than in those in the placebo group (14 vs nine patients), although none of these events were considered by the investigator to be benralizumab related. INTERPRETATION:Compared with placebo, benralizumab did not reduce the rate of acute exacerbations of COPD. However, the results of prespecified subgroup analysis support further investigation of benralizumab in patients with COPD and eosinophilia. FUNDING:MedImmune.

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy and safety of varenicline (a licensed cigarette smoking cessation aid) in helping users of smokeless tobacco to quit.DesignDouble blind, placebo controlled, parallel group, multicentre, randomised controlled trial.SettingMedical clinics (mostly primary care) in Norway and Sweden.ParticipantsMen and women aged ≥18 who used smokeless tobacco at least eight times a day, with no abstinence period over three months within one year before screening, who wanted to quit all tobacco use. Participants were excluded if they used any other form of tobacco (except smokeless tobacco) or medication to stop smoking within three months of screening or had any pre-existing medical or psychiatric condition.InterventionsVarenicline 1 mg twice daily (titrated during the first week) or placebo for 12 weeks, with 14 weeks' follow-up after treatment.Main outcome measuresThe primary end point was the four week continuous abstinence rate at the end of treatment (weeks 9-12) confirmed with cotinine concentration. A secondary end point was continuous abstinence rate for weeks 9-26. Safety and tolerability were also evaluated.Results431 participants (213 varenicline; 218 placebo) were randomised and received at least one dose of study drug. Participants' demographics and baseline use of smokeless tobacco were similar (89% (189) and 90% (196), respectively, were men; mean age in both groups was 43.9; participants used smokeless tobacco products about 15 times a day, and about 80% first used smokeless tobacco within 30 minutes after awakening). Continuous abstinence rate at week 9-12 was higher in the varenicline group than the placebo group (59% (125) v 39% (85); relative risk 1.60, 95% confidence interval 1.32 to 1.87, P<0.001; risk difference 20%; number needed to treat 5). The advantage of varenicline over placebo persisted through 14 weeks of follow-up (continuous abstinence rate at week 9-26 was 45% (95) v 34% (73); relative risk 1.42, 1.08 to 1.79, P=0.012; risk difference 11%; number needed to treat 9). The most common adverse events in the varenicline group compared with the placebo group were nausea (35% (74) v 6% (14)), fatigue (10% (22) v 7% (15)), headache (10% (22) v 9% (20)), and sleep disorder (10% (22) v 7% (15)). Few adverse events led to discontinuation of treatment (9% (19) and 4% (9), respectively), and serious adverse events occurred in two (1%) and three (1%) participants, respectively.ConclusionVarenicline can help people to give up smokeless tobacco and has an acceptable safety profile. The response rate in the placebo group in this study was high, suggesting a population less resistant to treatment than smokers.Trial registrationNCT00717093.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Therapies for chronic hepatitis delta virus (HDV) infection are unsatisfactory. Prenylation is essential for HDV and inhibition abrogates HDV production in experimental models. In a proof-of-concept study, we aimed to assess the effect on HDV RNA levels, safety, and tolerability of the prenylation inhibitor lonafarnib in patients with chronic delta hepatitis. METHODS:In this phase 2A double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled study, patients aged 18 years or older with chronic HDV infection were randomly assigned (3:1 in group 1 and 2:1 in group 2) to receive lonafarnib 100 mg (group 1) or lonafarnib 200 mg (group 2) twice daily for 28 days with 6 months' follow-up. Participants were randomised by random-number tables blocked in groups of four without stratification. Both groups enrolled six treatment participants and two placebo participants. Group 1 placebo patients received open-label lonafarnib as group 2 participants. The primary therapeutic endpoint was a decrease in HDV RNA viral titre in serum and the primary safety endpoint was the ability to tolerate the drug at the prescribed dose for the full 4-week duration, defined as drug discontinuation due to intolerance or grade 3/4 adverse events. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01495585. FINDINGS:Between Jan 19, 2012, and April 28, 2014, 14 patients were enrolled, of whom eight were assigned to group 1 and six were assigned to group 2. At day 28, compared with placebo, mean log HDV RNA declines from baseline were -0·73 log IU/mL in group 1 (95% CI 0·17-1·31; p=0·03) and -1·54 log IU/mL in group 2 (1·21-1·93; p<0·0001). Lonafarnib serum concentrations correlated with HDV RNA change (r(2)=0·78, p<0·0001). Model fits show that hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) remained stable after a short pharmacological delay (0·75 days [SE 0·24]), lonafarnib effectiveness in blocking HDV production was greater in group 2 than in group 1 (0·952 [SE 0·06] vs 0·739 [0·05], p<0·001), and the HDV half-life was 1·62 days (0·07). There was no evidence of virological resistance. Adverse events were mainly mild to moderate with group 1 patients experiencing diarrhoea in three patients (50%) and nausea in two patients (33%) and in group 2 with all patients (100%) experiencing nausea, diarrhoea, abdominal bloating, and weight loss greater than 2 kg (mean of 4 kg). No treatment discontinuations occurred in any treatment groups. INTERPRETATION:Treatment of chronic HDV with lonafarnib significantly reduces virus levels. The decline in virus levels significantly correlated with serum drug levels, providing further evidence for the efficacy of prenylation inhibition in chronic HDV. FUNDING:National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, and Eiger Biopharmaceuticals Inc.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Low-dose interleukin-2 (ld-IL-2) enhances regulatory T-cell (Treg) function in auto-inflammatory conditions. Neuroinflammation being a pathogenic feature of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), we evaluated the pharmacodynamics and safety of ld-IL-2 in ALS subjects. METHODS:We performed a single centre, parallel three-arm, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Eligibility criteria included age < 75 years, disease duration < 5 years, riluzole treatment > 3 months, and a slow vital capacity ? 70% of normal. Patients were randomised (1:1:1) to aldesleukin 2 MIU, 1 MIU, or placebo once daily for 5 days every 4 weeks for 3 cycles. Primary outcome was change from baseline in Treg percentage of CD4+ T cells (%Tregs) following a first cycle. Secondary laboratory outcomes included: %Treg and Treg number following repeated cycles, and plasma CCL2 and neurofilament light chain protein (NFL) concentrations as surrogate markers of efficacy. Safety outcomes included motor-function (ALSFRS-R), slow vital capacity (SVC), and adverse event reports. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02059759. FINDINGS:All randomised patients (12 per group), recruited from October 2015 to December 2015, were alive at the end of follow-up and included in the intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis. No drug-related serious adverse event was observed. Non-serious adverse events occurred more frequently with the 1 and 2 MIU IL-2 doses compared to placebo, including injection site reactions and flu-like symptoms. Primary outcome analysis showed a significant increase (p < 0·0001) in %Tregs in the 2 MIU and 1 MIU arms (mean [SD]: 2 MIU: +6·2% [2·2]; 1 MIU: +3·9% [1·2]) as compared to placebo (mean [SD]: -0·49% [1·3]). Effect sizes (ES) were large in treated groups: 2 MIU ES=3·7 (IC95%: 2·3-4·9) and 1 MIU ES=3·5 (IC95%: 2·1-4·6). Secondary outcomes showed a significant increase in %Tregs following repeated cycles (p < 0·0001) as compared to placebo, and a dose-dependent decrease in plasma CCL2 (p = 0·0049). There were no significant differences amongst the three groups on plasma NFL levels. INTERPRETATION:Ld-IL-2 is well tolerated and immunologically effective in subjects with ALS. These results warrant further investigation into their eventual therapeutic impact on slowing ALS disease progression. FUNDING:The French Health Ministry (PHRC-I-14-056), EU H2020 (grant #633413), and the Association pour la Recherche sur la SLA (ARSLA).