Project description:ObjectivesPrimary objective: To determine the efficacy of a candidate antiviral on time to virological cure compared to standard of care within 14 days of randomisation Secondary objectives: • To determine the safety of the antiviral • To determine the clinical benefit of the antiviral over placebo according to the WHO 7-point ordinal scale • To determine the clinical benefit of the antiviral over placebo on time to resolution of clinical symptoms • To determine the effect of the antiviral over placebo on biomarkers of inflammation and immune activation TRIAL DESIGN: This is a multi-centre, triple-blind, randomised placebo controlled phase II, 2-arm trial with parallel-group design with allocation ratio 1:1.ParticipantsInclusion Criteria: • Provision of informed consent by the participant • Age ≥18 years • Confirmed SARS-CoV-2 by nucleic acid testing in the past 5 days • COVID-19 related symptom initiation within 5 days • Female patients of childbearing potential must have a negative pregnancy test at Screening. Female patients of childbearing potential and fertile male patients who are sexually active with a female of childbearing potential must use highly effective methods of contraception throughout the study and for 1 week following the last dose of study treatment.Exclusion criteria• Known allergy to the study medication • Is on another clinical trial investigating an antiviral treatment for COVID-19 • Pregnancy • Patients with severe hepatic dysfunction equivalent to Grade C in the Child-Pugh classification • Patients with renal impairment requiring dialysis • Is deemed by the Investigator to be ineligible for any reason Participants will be recruited from, and the study visits will take place at Alfred Hospital, Monash Health, Austin Health in Victoria, Australia for hospitalised participants as well as recruitment in the community in participants homes for eligible people not requiring hospitalisation.Intervention and comparatorThe first candidate antiviral is favipiravir Arm 1: Favipiravir 1800 mg favipiravir BD on Day 1 followed by 800 mg BD favipiravir for the next 13 days. Arm 2: Placebo MAIN OUTCOMES: Primary outcome: Time to virological cure as defined by 2 successive throat (or combined nose/throat) swabs negative for SARS-CoV-2 by nucleic acid testing during the 14 days after enrolment.RandomisationRandomisation performed at the Alfred Hospital Clinical Trials Pharmacy using computer generated block-randomisation lists with 6 participants per block. Within each block half of the participants will be randomised to the candidate antiviral and the other half to placebo. Randomisation is stratified by study site, with participants enrolled in the community considered as a study site.Blinding (masking)Study participants, study investigators and the study statistician will be blinded to treatment allocation.Numbers to be randomised (sample size)The study aims to recruit 190 people (95/arm) with the first candidate antiviral favipiravir TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version 2.0 Dated 31-Jul-2020. Recruitment will take place between July 2020 and December 2020.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov NCT04445467 First posted 24-Jun-2020 FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

Project description:BackgroundBecause treatment with third-generation cephalosporins is associated with slow clinical improvement and high relapse burden for enteric fever, whereas the fluoroquinolone gatifloxacin is associated with rapid fever clearance and low relapse burden, we postulated that gatifloxacin would be superior to the cephalosporin ceftriaxone in treating enteric fever.MethodsWe did an open-label, randomised, controlled, superiority trial at two hospitals in the Kathmandu valley, Nepal. Eligible participants were children (aged 2-13 years) and adult (aged 14-45 years) with criteria for suspected enteric fever (body temperature ≥38·0°C for ≥4 days without a focus of infection). We randomly assigned eligible patients (1:1) without stratification to 7 days of either oral gatifloxacin (10 mg/kg per day) or intravenous ceftriaxone (60 mg/kg up to 2 g per day for patients aged 2-13 years, or 2 g per day for patients aged ≥14 years). The randomisation list was computer-generated using blocks of four and six. The primary outcome was a composite of treatment failure, defined as the occurrence of at least one of the following: fever clearance time of more than 7 days after treatment initiation; the need for rescue treatment on day 8; microbiological failure (ie, blood cultures positive for Salmonella enterica serotype Typhi, or Paratyphi A, B, or C) on day 8; or relapse or disease-related complications within 28 days of treatment initiation. We did the analyses in the modified intention-to-treat population, and subpopulations with either confirmed blood-culture positivity, or blood-culture negativity. The trial was powered to detect an increase of 20% in the risk of failure. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01421693, and is now closed.FindingsBetween Sept 18, 2011, and July 14, 2014, we screened 725 patients for eligibility. On July 14, 2014, the trial was stopped early by the data safety and monitoring board because S Typhi strains with high-level resistance to ciprofloxacin and gatifloxacin had emerged. At this point, 239 were in the modified intention-to-treat population (120 assigned to gatifloxacin, 119 to ceftriaxone). 18 (15%) patients who received gatifloxacin had treatment failure, compared with 19 (16%) who received ceftriaxone (hazard ratio [HR] 1·04 [95% CI 0·55-1·98]; p=0·91). In the culture-confirmed population, 16 (26%) of 62 patients who received gatifloxacin failed treatment, compared with four (7%) of 54 who received ceftriaxone (HR 0·24 [95% CI 0·08-0·73]; p=0·01). Treatment failure was associated with the emergence of S Typhi exhibiting resistance against fluoroquinolones, requiring the trial to be stopped. By contrast, in patients with a negative blood culture, only two (3%) of 58 who received gatifloxacin failed treatment versus 15 (23%) of 65 who received ceftriaxone (HR 7·50 [95% CI 1·71-32·80]; p=0·01). A similar number of non-serious adverse events occurred in each treatment group, and no serious events were reported.InterpretationOur results suggest that fluoroquinolones should no longer be used for treatment of enteric fever in Nepal. Additionally, under our study conditions, ceftriaxone was suboptimum in a high proportion of patients with culture-negative enteric fever. Since antimicrobials, specifically fluoroquinolones, are one of the only routinely used control measures for enteric fever, the assessment of novel diagnostics, new treatment options, and use of existing vaccines and development of next-generation vaccines are now a high priority.FundingWellcome Trust and Li Ka Shing Foundation.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Glucose management is challenging in patients who require nutritional support in hospital. We aimed to assess whether fully closed-loop insulin delivery would improve glycaemic control compared with conventional subcutaneous insulin therapy in inpatients receiving enteral or parenteral nutrition or both. METHODS:We did a two-centre (UK and Switzerland), open-label, randomised controlled trial in adult inpatients receiving enteral or parenteral nutrition (or both) who required subcutaneous insulin therapy. Patients recruited from non-critical care surgical and medical wards were randomly assigned (1:1) using a computer-generated minimisation schedule (stratified by type of nutritional support [parenteral nutrition on or off] and pre-study total daily insulin dose [<50 or ≥50 units]) to receive fully closed-loop insulin delivery with faster-acting insulin aspart (closed-loop group) or conventional subcutaneous insulin therapy (control group) given in accordance with local clinical practice. Continuous glucose monitoring in the control group was masked to patients, ward staff, and investigators. Patients were followed up for a maximum of 15 days or until hospital discharge. The primary endpoint was the proportion of time that sensor glucose concentration was in target range (5·6-10·0 mmol/L), assessed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01774565. FINDINGS:Between Feb 8, 2018, and Sept 21, 2018, 90 patients were assessed for eligibility, of whom 43 were enrolled and randomly assigned to the closed-loop group (n=21) or the control group (n=22). The proportion of time that sensor glucose was in the target range was 68·4% [SD 15·5] in the closed-loop group and 36·4% [26·6] in the control group (difference 32·0 percentage points [95% CI 18·5-45·5; p<0·0001]). One serious adverse event occurred in each group (one cardiac arrest in the control group and one episode of acute respiratory failure in the closed-loop group), both of which were unrelated to study interventions. There were no adverse events related to study interventions in either group. No episodes of severe hypoglycaemia or hyperglycaemia with ketonaemia occurred in either study group. INTERPRETATION:Closed-loop insulin delivery is an effective treatment option to improve glycaemic control in patients receiving nutritional support in hospital. FUNDING:Diabetes UK, Swiss National Science Foundation, National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, Wellcome Trust, and European Foundation for the Study of Diabetes.

Dataset Information

Effect of dexamethasone in patients with ARDS and COVID-19 - prospective, multi-centre, open-label, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial (REMED trial): A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure