Dataset Information

Feasibility of investigating methylphenidate for the treatment of sarcoidosis-associated fatigue (the FaST-MP study): a double-blind, parallel-arm randomised feasibility trial.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Sarcoidosis-associated fatigue (SAF) is a common clinical problem with limited treatment options. This study was undertaken to determine the feasibility of performing a definitive trial to determine the clinical efficacy methylphenidate in SAF.

Methods

This was a parallel-arm, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised controlled feasibility trial enrolling sarcoidosis patients reporting significant fatigue. Patients with a Fatigue Assessment Scale score of more than 21 were randomised to receive up to either 10 mg two times per day methylphenidate or identical placebo capsules two times per day, in a dose escalation fashion, for up to 24 weeks. Outcomes included number of participants eligible and willing to participate, withdrawal rates, adherence rates and ability to maintain blinding.

Results

Of 385 patients screened, 56 (14.5%) were eligible and 23 (41% of eligible patients) were randomised. No withdrawals occurred. One participant in the methylphenidate arm discontinued study medications due to chest pain. The side effect profile was not different between the groups. Median medication adherence rates were 98% and 99% in the methylphenidate and placebo arms, respectively. A greater proportion of participants receiving methylphenidate predicted their allocated treatment while blinded compared with those receiving placebo (93.3% vs 57.1%). The investigator could not predict the treatment allocation. Both groups showed clinically meaningful improvements in fatigue from baseline, although no between-group difference was seen.

Conclusions

The data support the feasibility of performing a double-blind parallel trial powered to determine the clinical efficacy of methylphenidate for SAF, however, a multicentre study will be required.

Trial registration number

NCT02643732.

SUBMITTER: Atkins C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8144057 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background:Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a chronic progressive inflammatory disease of the airways, associated with frailty, disability, co-morbidity, and mortality. Individuals with COPD experience increased risk and rates of acute exacerbation as their lung disease worsens. Current treatments to prevent acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD) are only modestly effective. New therapies are needed to improve the quality of life and clinical outcomes for individuals living with COPD and especially for those prone to frequent recurrent AECOPD. Recent research has suggested an association of gammaglobulin or immunoglobulin G levels with AECOPD and a favorable effect of an immunoglobulin treatment on the frequency of recurrent AECOPD, healthcare provider visits, treatments, and hospitalizations. However, control trials are required to confirm this apparent association and therapeutic effect. This study aims to assess if intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) therapy is feasible, safe, tolerable, and potentially effective in reducing the frequency of recurrent AECOPD. Methods/design:Adult COPD patients at The Ottawa Hospital (TOH) will be recruited to partake in a randomized double-blind, parallel, two-arm, placebo control trial. Eligible patients will be administered either IVIG or normal saline following 1:1 randomization and every 4 weeks for 1 year. The primary outcome of feasibility will be determined by recruitment, patient adherence, safety and tolerance, success of the follow-up procedures, and outcome measurement. The safety and tolerability will be assessed through adverse events, adherence, and study withdrawals. Efficacy trends will be investigated by assessing incidence rates of AECOPD, improvement in quality of life, and healthcare services use and cost. Discussion:The study results will inform larger studies designed to confirm a clinically significant therapeutic effect in identifiable populations which would be a major advance in the care of COPD patients. Trial registration number:ClinicalTrial.gov, NCT03018652 and NCT02690038.

Project description:BackgroundChronic fatigue is a prominent symptom in many sarcoidosis patients, affecting quality of life and interfering with treatment. This study investigated neuropsychobiological mechanisms and markers of chronic fatigue in sarcoidosis.MethodsThirty patients with a histological diagnosis of sarcoidosis were included. The Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory was used to define patients with and without chronic fatigue. All patients were then characterised using several depression, quality of life questionnaires, and executive functioning. Cognitive functioning and underlying neural correlates were assessed using an n-back task measuring working memory and (sustained) attention during functional magnetic resonance imaging. Sarcoidosis disease activity was determined using lung function, laboratory parameters, and exercise capacity.ResultsNineteen patients had chronic fatigue and 11 did not; both groups had similar demographic and disease activity characteristics. Chronic fatigue patients showed more symptoms of depression and anxiety, and lower quality of life. During the n-back task, chronic fatigue was associated with a smaller increase in brain activation with increasing task difficulty versus the group without fatigue, especially in the angular gyrus.ConclusionInadequate adjustment of brain activation with increasing demands appears to be a potential neurobiological marker of chronic fatigue in sarcoidosis patients. The angular gyrus, which plays an important role in the working memory system, was the major area in which fatigue patients showed smaller increase of brain activation compared to those without fatigue. These findings might be relevant for a deeper understanding of chronic fatigue mechanisms in sarcoidosis and future clinical treatment of this disabling syndrome.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, Trial registration number: NCT04178239Date of registration: November 26, 2019, retrospectively registeredURL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04178239.

Project description:BackgroundMethylphenidate, modafinil, and amantadine are commonly prescribed medications for alleviating fatigue in multiple sclerosis; however, the evidence supporting their efficacy is sparse and conflicting. Our goal was to compare the efficacy of these three medications with each other and placebo in patients with multiple sclerosis fatigue.MethodsIn this randomised, placebo-controlled, four-sequence, four-period, crossover, double-blind trial, patients with multiple sclerosis who reported fatigue and had a Modified Fatigue Impact Scale (MFIS) score of more than 33 were recruited at two academic multiple sclerosis centres in the USA. Participants received oral amantadine (up to 100 mg twice daily), modafinil (up to 100 mg twice daily), methylphenidate (up to 10 mg twice daily), or placebo, each given for up to 6 weeks. All patients were intended to receive all four study medications, in turn, in one of four different sequences with 2-week washout periods between medications. A biostatistician prepared a concealed allocation schedule, stratified by site, randomly assigning a sequence of medications in approximately a 1:1:1:1 ratio, in blocks of eight, to a consecutive series of numbers. The statistician and pharmacists had no role in assessing the participants or collecting data, and the participants, caregivers, and assessors were masked to allocation. The primary outcome measure was the MFIS measured while taking the highest tolerated dose at week 5 of each medication period, analysed by use of a linear mixed-effect regression model. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03185065 and is closed.FindingsBetween Oct 4, 2017, and Feb 27, 2019, of 169 patients screened, 141 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to one of four medication administration sequences: 35 (25%) patients to the amantadine, placebo, modafinil, and methylphenidate sequence; 34 (24%) patients to the placebo, methylphenidate, amantadine, and modafinil sequence; 35 (25%) patients to the modafinil, amantadine, methylphenidate, and placebo sequence; and 37 (26%) patients to the methylphenidate, modafinil, placebo, and amantadine sequence. Data from 136 participants were available for the intention-to-treat analysis of the primary outcome. The estimated mean values of MFIS total scores at baseline and the maximal tolerated dose were as follows: 51·3 (95% CI 49·0-53·6) at baseline, 40·6 (38·2-43·1) with placebo, 41·3 (38·8-43·7) with amantadine, 39·0 (36·6-41·4) with modafinil, and 38·6 (36·2-41·0) with methylphenidate (p=0·20 for the overall medication effect in the linear mixed-effect regression model). As compared with placebo (38 [31%] of 124 patients), higher proportions of participants reported adverse events while taking amantadine (49 [39%] of 127 patients), modafinil (50 [40%] of 125 patients), and methylphenidate (51 [40%] of 129 patients). Three serious adverse events occurred during the study (pulmonary embolism and myocarditis while taking amantadine, and a multiple sclerosis exacerbation requiring hospital admission while taking modafinil).InterpretationAmantadine, modafinil, and methylphenidate were not superior to placebo in improving multiple sclerosis fatigue and caused more frequent adverse events. The results of this study do not support an indiscriminate use of amantadine, modafinil, or methylphenidate for the treatment of fatigue in multiple sclerosis.FundingPatient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute.

Project description:BackgroundMany university students experience high levels of study-related fatigue. This high prevalence, and the negative impact of fatigue on health and academic performance, call for prevention and reduction of these symptoms. The primary aim of the current study was to investigate to what extent an exercise intervention is effective in reducing three indicators of study-related fatigue (emotional exhaustion, overall fatigue, and need for recovery). Effects of exercise on secondary outcomes (sleep quality, self-efficacy, physical fitness, and cognitive functioning) were also investigated.MethodsParticipants were students with high levels of study-related fatigue, currently not exercising or receiving other psychological or pharmacological treatments, and with no medical cause of fatigue. They were randomly assigned to either a six-week exercise intervention (low-intensity running three times a week, n = 49) or wait list (no intervention, n = 48). All participants were measured before the intervention (T0), and immediately after the intervention (T1). Exercisers were also investigated 4 weeks (T2) and 12 weeks (T3) after the intervention.ResultsParticipants in the exercise condition showed a larger decrease in two of the three indicators of study-related fatigue (i.e., overall fatigue and need for recovery) as compared to controls. Additionally, sleep quality and some indicators of cognitive functioning improved more among exercisers than among controls. No effects were found for self-efficacy, and physical fitness. The initial effects of the exercise intervention lasted at follow-up (T2 and T3). At 12-week follow up (T3), 80% of participants in the exercise condition still engaged in regular exercise, and further enhancements were seen for emotional exhaustion, overall fatigue, and sleep quality.ConclusionsThese results underline the value of low-intensity exercise for university students with high levels of study-related fatigue. The follow-up effects that were found in this study imply that the intervention has the potential to promote regular exercise and accompanying beneficial effects in the longer run.Trial registrationNetherlands Trial Register NTR4412.

Project description:BackgroundThere is currently insufficient evidence on the safety and efficacy of antenatal corticosteroids in preventing mortality and severe morbidity amongst late preterm newborns in low-resource countries.MethodsWe conducted a double-blind, randomized trial in four hospitals in India between 26 December 2017 to 21 May 2020. Pregnant women at risk of imminent preterm birth between 34 weeks 0 days and 36 weeks 0 days of gestation were recruited. Women were randomly assigned (1:1) to a course of 6 mg intramuscular dexamethasone or an identical placebo. All trial participants, research staff and outcome assessors were masked to allocation. Primary outcomes were neonatal death, any baby death (stillbirth or neonatal death), severe neonatal respiratory distress and possible maternal bacterial infection. The study was registered with ANZCTR (ACTRN12617001494325) and CTRI (CTRI/2017/05/008721).FindingsWe randomized 782 women, 391 to each arm. Neonatal death occurred in 11 of 412 liveborn babies (2.7%) in the dexamethasone group and 12 of 425 liveborn babies (2.8%) in the placebo group (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.42-2.12). Any baby death occurred in 16 of 417 infants (3.8%) in the dexamethasone group and 19 of 432 infants (4.4%) in the placebo group (RR 0.87; 95% CI 0.45-1.67). Severe neonatal respiratory distress was infrequent in both groups (0.8% vs 0.5%; RR 1.56; 95% CI 0.26-9.29). Possible maternal bacterial infection did not differ between groups (2.3% vs. 3.8%, RR 0.60; 95% CI 0.27-1.35). Fewer neonates in the dexamethasone group required resuscitation at birth (RR 0.38, CI 0.15-0.97). Other secondary outcomes were similar in the two arms. The trial was stopped due to lower than expected prevalence of primary outcomes and slow recruitment.InterpretationAntenatal dexamethasone did not result in a reduction in neonatal death, stillbirth or neonatal death, or severe neonatal respiratory distress in this trial. The overall trend of effects suggests that potential benefit of dexamethasone in late preterm cannot be excluded, and further trials are required.FundingThis trial was primarily funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (Grant OPP1136821). Additional support was provided by UNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP), Department of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research; and Department of Maternal, Newborn, Child, Adolescent Health, and Ageing, of the World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.