Dataset Information

Study protocol: a multicentre, open-label, parallel-group, phase 2, randomised controlled trial of autologous macrophage therapy for liver cirrhosis (MATCH).

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Liver cirrhosis is a growing global healthcare challenge. Cirrhosis is characterised by severe liver fibrosis, organ dysfunction and complications related to portal hypertension. There are no licensed antifibrotic or proregenerative medicines and liver transplantation is a scarce resource. Hepatic macrophages can promote both liver fibrogenesis and fibrosis regression. The safety and feasibility of peripheral infusion of ex vivo matured autologous monocyte-derived macrophages in patients with compensated cirrhosis has been demonstrated.

Methods and analysis

The efficacy of autologous macrophage therapy, compared with standard medical care, will be investigated in a cohort of adult patients with compensated cirrhosis in a multicentre, open-label, parallel-group, phase 2, randomised controlled trial. The primary outcome is the change in Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score at 90 days. The trial will provide the first high-quality examination of the efficacy of autologous macrophage therapy in improving liver function, non-invasive fibrosis markers and other clinical outcomes in patients with compensated cirrhosis.

Ethics and dissemination

The trial will be conducted according to the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki 2013 and has been approved by Scotland A Research Ethics Committee (reference 15/SS/0121), National Health Service Lothian Research and Development department and the Medicine and Health Care Regulatory Agency-UK. Final results will be presented in peer-reviewed journals and at relevant conferences.

Trial registration numbers

ISRCTN10368050 and EudraCT; reference 2015-000963-15.

SUBMITTER: Brennan PN

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8576470 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Study protocol: a multicentre, open-label, parallel-group, phase 2, randomised controlled trial of autologous macrophage therapy for liver cirrhosis (MATCH).

Brennan Paul Noel PN MacMillan Mark M Manship Thomas T Moroni Francesca F Glover Alison A Graham Catriona C Semple Scott S Morris David M DM Fraser Alasdair R AR Pass Chloe C McGowan Neil W A NWA Turner Marc L ML Lachlan Neil N Dillon John F JF Campbell John D M JDM Fallowfield Jonathan Andrew JA Forbes Stuart J SJ

BMJ open 20211108 11

<h4>Introduction</h4>Liver cirrhosis is a growing global healthcare challenge. Cirrhosis is characterised by severe liver fibrosis, organ dysfunction and complications related to portal hypertension. There are no licensed antifibrotic or proregenerative medicines and liver transplantation is a scarce resource. Hepatic macrophages can promote both liver fibrogenesis and fibrosis regression. The safety and feasibility of peripheral infusion of ex vivo matured autologous monocyte-derived macrophage ...[more]

PMID: 34750149

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 is a viral prothrombotic respiratory infection. Heparins exert antithrombotic and anti-inflammatory effects, and might have antiviral properties. We aimed to investigate whether thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin would prevent untoward hospitalisation and death in symptomatic, but clinically stable outpatients with COVID-19.MethodsOVID was a randomised, open-label, parallel-group, investigator-initiated, phase 3 trial and was done at eight centres in Switzerland and Germany. Outpatients aged 50 years or older with acute COVID-19 were eligible if they presented with respiratory symptoms or body temperature higher than 37·5°C. Eligible participants underwent block-stratified randomisation (by age group 50-70 vs >70 years and by study centre) in a 1:1 ratio to receive either subcutaneous enoxaparin 40 mg once daily for 14 days versus standard of care (no thromboprophylaxis). The primary outcome was a composite of any untoward hospitalisation and all-cause death within 30 days of randomisation. Analysis of the efficacy outcomes was done in the intention-to-treat population. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding. The study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04400799) and has been completed.FindingsAt the predefined formal interim analysis for efficacy (50% of total study population), the independent Data Safety Monitoring Board recommended early termination of the trial on the basis of predefined statistical criteria having considered the very low probability of showing superiority of thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin for the primary outcome under the initial study design assumptions. Between Aug 15, 2020, and Jan 14, 2022, from 3319 participants prescreened, 472 were included in the intention-to-treat population and randomly assigned to receive enoxaparin (n=234) or standard of care (n=238). The median age was 57 years (IQR 53-62) and 217 (46%) were women. The 30-day risk of the primary outcome was similar in participants allocated to receive enoxaparin and in controls (8 [3%] of 234 vs 8 [3%] of 238; adjusted relative risk 0·98; 95% CI 0·37-2·56; p=0·96). All hospitalisations were related to COVID-19. No deaths were reported during the study. No major bleeding events were recorded. Eight serious adverse events were recorded in the enoxaparin group versus nine in the control group.InterpretationThese findings suggest thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin does not reduce early hospitalisations and deaths among outpatients with symptomatic COVID-19. Futility of the treatment under the initial study design assumptions could not be conclusively assessed owing to under-representation of older patients and consequent low event rates.FundingSNSF (National Research Programme COVID-19 NRP78: 198352), University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Dr-Ing Georg Pollert (Berlin), Johanna Dürmüller-Bol Foundation.

Project description:BackgroundA recent study shows that dual antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel plus aspirin is superior to aspirin monotherapy for minor stroke, which is defined as a National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS)score of ≤3. However, acute mild-moderate ischaemic stroke (4≤NIHSS≤10) still needs aggressive antiplatelet intervention to prevent deterioration and recurrence of stroke. The efficacy and safety of dual antiplatelet therapy versus aspirin monotherapy in the population are not clear. A multicentre clinical trial is designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of clopidogrel plus aspirin therapy versus aspirin monotherapy within 48 hours of symptom onset of mild-moderate ischaemic stroke.Methods/designThe study is a randomised, open-label, multicentre, prospective trial with a target enrolment of 2700 patients from 60 centres in Northeast China. A treatment allocation identification number to each enrolled patient will be provided by a random number generator. The follow-up time for the clopidogrel plus aspirin and aspirin monotherapy groups is 90 days. The primary efficacy endpoint is a stroke progression event, which is defined as ≥4 point increase in the NIHSS score in 48 hours. The second efficacy endpoints include new ischaemic stroke within 90 days, change in the NIHSS score within 14 days, modified Rankin Scale score on day 90 and other vascular or death events within 90 days. The safety endpoints include mucocutaneous haemorrhage, organ haemorrhage and intracranial haemorrhage, adverse events and severe adverse events. χ2 test, t-test (or Mann-Whitney test), survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards models will be conducted. The findings of the study may provide an important evidence for clinical practice for these patients.DiscussionThe trial will be conducted under a rational design and will provide valuable evidence on the appropriate treatment for this population.Ethics and disseminationThe study was reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee of the General Hospital of Shen-Yang Military Region (no K(2016) 6).Trial registration numberNCT02869009; Pre-results.

Project description:IntroductionLiver disease mortality and morbidity are rapidly rising and liver transplantation is limited by organ availability. Small scale human studies have shown that stem cell therapy is safe and feasible and has suggested clinical benefit. No published studies have yet examined the effect of stem cell therapy in a randomised controlled trial and evaluated the effect of repeated therapy.Methods and analysisPatients with liver cirrhosis will be randomised to one of three trial groups: group 1: Control group, Standard conservative management; group 2 treatment: granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF; lenograstim) 15 µg/kg body weight daily on days 1-5; group 3 treatment: G-CSF 15 µg/kg body weight daily on days 1-5 followed by leukapheresis, isolation and aliquoting of CD133+ cells. Patients will receive an infusion of freshly isolated CD133+ cells immediately and frozen doses at days 30 and 60 via peripheral vein (0.2×10(6) cells/kg for each of the three doses). Primary objective is to demonstrate an improvement in the severity of liver disease over 3 months using either G-CSF alone or G-CSF followed by repeated infusions of haematopoietic stem cells compared with standard conservative management. The trial is powered to answer two hypotheses of each treatment compared to control but not powered to detect smaller expected differences between the two treatment groups. As such, the overall α=0.05 for the trial is split equally between the two hypotheses. Conventionally, to detect a relevant standardised effect size of 0.8 point reduction in Model for End-stage Liver Disease score using two-sided α=0.05(overall α=0.1 split equally between the two hypotheses) and 80% power requires 27 participants to be randomised per group (81 participants in total).Ethics and disseminationThe trial is registered at Current Controlled Trials on 18 November 2009 (ISRCTN number 91288089, EuDRACT number 2009-010335-41). The findings of this trial will be disseminated to patients and through peer-reviewed publications and international presentations.

Project description:IntroductionAnaemia in pregnancy remains a critical global health problem, affecting 46% of pregnant women in Africa and 49% in Asia. Oral iron therapy requires extended adherence to achieve correction of anaemia and replenishment of iron stores. Ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) is a recently established intravenous iron formulation associated with substantial advantages in safety, speed of delivery and total dose deliverable in a single infusion. We aim to determine whether FCM given once during the second trimester of pregnancy compared with standard oral iron distributed through routine antenatal services is effective and safe for treatment of moderate to severe maternal anaemia in sub-Saharan Africa.Methods and analysisThe randomized controlled trial of the effect of intravenous iron on anaemia in Malawian pregnant women (REVAMP) is a two-arm confirmatory individually randomised trial set in Blantyre and Zomba districts in Malawi. The trial will randomise 862 women in the second trimester of pregnancy with a capillary haemoglobin concentration below 100.0 g/L. The study comprises two arms: (a) intravenous FCM (20 mg/kg up to 1000 mg) given once at randomisation, and (b) standard of care oral iron (65 mg elemental iron two times per day) for 90 days (or the duration of pregnancy, whichever is shorter) provided according to local healthcare practices. Both arms receive sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine as intermittent preventive treatment in pregnancy. The primary outcome is the prevalence of anaemia (Hb <110.0 g/L) at 36 weeks' gestation. Secondary outcomes include birth weight, gestation duration and safety outcomes, including clinical malaria, serious perinatal events and postpartum haematologic and health-related outcomes in the mother and child.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was granted by the Research Ethics Committee (COMREC P.02/18/2357) in Malawi and the Human Research Ethics Committee (WEHI: 18/02), Melbourne, Australia. The protocol is registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry. The results will be shared with the local community that enabled the research, and also to the international fora.Trial registration numberACTRN12618001268235; Pre-results.

Project description:IntroductionCOVID-19 induces venous, arterial and microvascular thrombosis, involving several pathophysiological processes. In patients with severe COVID-19 without macrovascular thrombosis, escalating into high-dose prophylactic anticoagulation (HD-PA) or therapeutic anticoagulation (TA) could be beneficial in limiting the extension of microvascular thrombosis and forestalling the evolution of lung and multiorgan microcirculatory dysfunction. In the absence of data from randomised trials, clinical practice varies widely.Methods and analysisThis is a French multicentre, parallel-group, open-label, randomised controlled superiority trial to compare the efficacy and safety of three anticoagulation strategies in patients with COVID-19. Patients with oxygen-treated COVID-19 showing no pulmonary artery thrombosis on computed tomography with pulmonary angiogram will be randomised to receive either low-dose PA, HD-PA or TA for 14 days. Patients attaining the extremes of weight and those with severe renal failure will not be included. We will recruit 353 patients. Patients will be randomised on a 1:1:1 basis, and stratified by centre, use of invasive mechanical ventilation, D-dimer levels and body mass index. The primary endpoint is a hierarchical criterion at day 28 including all-cause mortality, followed by the time to clinical improvement defined as the time from randomisation to an improvement of at least two points on the ordinal clinical scale. Secondary outcomes include thrombotic and major bleeding events at day 28, individual components of the primary endpoint, number of oxygen-free, ventilator-free and vasopressor-free days at day 28, D-dimer and sepsis-induced coagulopathy score at day 7, intensive care unit and hospital stay at day 28 and day 90, and all-cause death and quality of life at day 90.Ethics and disseminationThe study has been approved by an ethical committee (Ethics Committee, Ile de France VII, Paris, France; reference 2020-A03531-38). Patients will be included after obtaining their signed informed consent. The results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberNCT04808882.

Project description:BackgroundChronic fatigue is a poorly managed problem in people with inflammatory rheumatic diseases. Cognitive behavioural approaches (CBA) and personalised exercise programmes (PEP) can be effective, but they are not often implemented because their effectivenesses across the different inflammatory rheumatic diseases are unknown and regular face-to-face sessions are often undesirable, especially during a pandemic. We hypothesised that remotely delivered CBA and PEP would effectively alleviate fatigue severity and life impact across inflammatory rheumatic diseases.MethodsLIFT is a multicentre, randomised, controlled, open-label, parallel-group trial to assess usual care alongside telephone-delivered CBA or PEP against usual care alone in UK hospitals. Patients with any stable inflammatory rheumatic disease were eligible if they reported clinically significant, persistent fatigue. Treatment allocation was assigned by a web-based randomisation system. CBA and PEP sessions were delivered over 6 months by trained health professionals in rheumatology. Coprimary outcomes were fatigue severity (Chalder Fatigue Scale) and impact (Fatigue Severity Scale) at 56 weeks. The primary analysis was by full analysis set. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03248518).FindingsFrom Sept 4, 2017, to Sept 30, 2019, we randomly assigned and treated 367 participants to PEP (n=124; one participant withdrew after being randomly assinged), CBA (n=121), or usual care alone (n=122), of whom 274 (75%) were women and 92 (25%) were men with an overall mean age of 57·5 (SD 12·7) years. Analyses for Chalder Fatigue Scale included 101 participants in the PEP group, 107 in the CBA group, and 107 in the usual care group and for Fatigue Severity Scale included 101 in PEP, 106 in CBA, and 107 in usual care groups. PEP and CBA significantly improved fatigue severity (Chalder Fatigue Scale; PEP: adjusted mean difference -3·03 [97·5% CI -5·05 to -1·02], p=0·0007; CBA: -2·36 [-4·28 to -0·44], p=0·0058) and fatigue impact (Fatigue Severity Scale; PEP: -0·64 [-0·95 to -0·33], p<0·0001; CBA: -0·58 [-0·87 to -0·28], p<0·0001); compared with usual care alone at 56 weeks. No trial-related serious adverse events were reported.InterpretationTelephone-delivered CBA and PEP produced and maintained statistically and clinically significant reductions in the severity and impact of fatigue in a variety of inflammatory rheumatic diseases. These interventions should be considered as a key component of inflammatory rheumatic disease management in routine clinical practice.FundingVersus Arthritis.

Dataset Information

Study protocol: a multicentre, open-label, parallel-group, phase 2, randomised controlled trial of autologous macrophage therapy for liver cirrhosis (MATCH).

Introduction

Methods and analysis

Ethics and dissemination

Trial registration numbers

Publications

Study protocol: a multicentre, open-label, parallel-group, phase 2, randomised controlled trial of autologous macrophage therapy for liver cirrhosis (MATCH).

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets