Efficacy and safety of disodium ascorbyl phytostanol phosphates in men with moderate dyslipidemia.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Vissers MN
PROVIDER: S-EPMC2426926 | biostudies-other | 2008 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:Objective:Postmenopausal women show a more atherogenic lipid profile and elevated cardiovascular risk compared to premenopausal women. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of high-dose atorvastatin on the improvement of the blood lipid profile of postmenopausal women in Korea. Methods:This study is a prospective, open-label, single-arm clinical trial that was conducted in 3 teaching hospitals. Postmenopausal women with a moderate-to-high cardiovascular risk, according to guidelines from the Korean Society of Lipid & Atherosclerosis, were enrolled. Participants were administered 20 mg of atorvastatin daily for the first 8 weeks, and if the targeted low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level was not achieved, the dose was increased to 40 mg for the second 8 weeks. The primary endpoint was percentage change of LDL-C from baseline after 16 weeks of drug administration. Results:Forty-four women were enrolled, 28 of whom (75.6%) had diabetes mellitus. By the end of treatment period (16 weeks) all patients had achieved LDL-C target levels, with 33 (94.2%) of the participants achieving it after only 8 weeks of administration. After 16 weeks, LDL-C decreased by 45.8±16.7% (p<0.001) from the baseline, and total cholesterol (33.2±10.9%; p<0.001), triglyceride (24.2±37.5%; p=0.001), and apolipoprotein B (34.9±15.6%; p<0.001) also significantly decreased. Blood glucose and liver enzyme levels slightly increased, but none of the participants developed serious adverse events that would cause them to prematurely withdraw from the clinical trial. Conclusion:20 and 40 mg atorvastatin was effective and safe for treating dyslipidemia in postmenopausal Korean women with moderate-to-high cardiovascular risk.
| S-EPMC7379073 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This was a phase II, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded single center study (clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01806662) to investigate safety and efficacy of ustekinumab treatment in moderate-to-severe AD patients. Patients underwent 1:1 randomization using a computer generated subject randomization table by an unblinded pharmacist. to Subjects received subcutaneous ustekinumab or placebo at weeks 0, 4, and 16 with a crossover to the other agent (either ustekinumab or placebo) at weeks 16, 20, and 32 (Figure 1A) to ensure patient retention.
2019-11-20 | GSE140684 | GEO
Project description:Background: Fospropofol disodium for injection (FospropofolFD) is a prodrug that is metabolized into propofol to produce a general anesthesia effect when administered intravenously. Objective: This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of FospropofolFD in comparison with propofol medium/long-chain fat emulsion injections (propofol-MCT/LCT) for general anesthesia induction in adult patients undergoing elective surgeries. Setting: Nine academic medical centers in China. Method: This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-simulated, controlled, and non-inferiority trial evaluated 540 eligible adult patients randomly assigned (2:1) to the intervention (20 mg/kg FospropofolFD) or control (2 mg/kg propofol-MCT/LCT) groups. Main Outcome Measure: The primary efficacy endpoint was the success rate, defined as a Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale score of 1 within 5 min after study drug administration. The safety endpoints consisted of adverse events (AEs) related to consciousness, cognitive function, hemodynamic status, liver and kidney function, and blood tests. Results: A total of 347 (96.3%) and 175 (97.2%) patients in the intervention and control groups, respectively, completed the study. The success rate for the primary outcome was 97.7% for both study drugs. The most frequent AEs in the intervention group were abnormal feeling (62.0%), blood pressure reduction (13.5%), and injection site pain (13.3%). No AEs related to consciousness and mental and cognitive functions or serious adverse events were reported. Conclusion: FospropofolFD (20 mg/kg) is not inferior to propofol-MCT/LCT (2 mg/kg) in general anesthesia induction for American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I-II adult patients undergoing elective surgeries. It is safe and effective for clinical use under anesthesiologist monitoring. Impact on Practice Statement: FospropofolFD can produce a general anesthesia effect and reduce the incidence of pain at the site of injection.
| S-EPMC8473892 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundBullous pemphigoid (BP) is an autoimmune blistering disorder that predominantly affects the elderly. As the main treatment for BP, systemic corticosteroids are often limited by their side effects. Safer treatment modalities are therefore needed. Dupilumab is a biologic agent used to treat BP in recent years.MethodsMedical records of patients with moderate-to-severe BP were retrospectively reviewed. Twenty-four patients were included (follow-up period: 32 weeks), eight of whom received dupilumab in combination with methylprednisolone and azathioprine (dupilumab group) while the other 16 patients received methylprednisolone and azathioprine (conventional group). Response to dupilumab was evaluated by comparison of several parameters (time to stop new blister formation, time to reduce the systemic glucocorticoids to minimal dose, and total amount of methylprednisolone).ResultsThe median age of patients in the dupilumab and conventional groups were 64.50 years (range: 22-90 years) and 64.50 years (range: 17-86 years), respectively. The median duration of disease before admission in the dupilumab group was 2 months (range: 1-240 months) and 2.5 months (range: 1-60 months) in the conventional group. The median time to stop new blister formation was 8 days (range: 1-13 days) and 12 days (range: 5-21 days) in patients of the dupilumab and conventional groups, respectively (p = 0.028 by Kaplan-Meier analysis). In addition, the median time to reduce the systemic glucocorticoids to minimal dose (methylprednisolone 0.08 mg/kg/day) was 121.5 and 148.5 days for the dupilumab and conventional therapy groups, respectively (p = 0.0053 by Kaplan-Meier analysis). The median total amount of methylprednisolone (at the time of reaching the minimal dose) used in the dupilumab group was 1,898 mg (range: 1,624-2,932 mg) while the cumulative dose of conventional group was 2,344 mg (range: 1,708-4,744 mg) (p = 0.036 by Mann-Whitney U test). The median total amount of azathioprine (at the time of reaching the minimal dose) used in dupilumab group was 8,300 mg (range: 7,100-10,400 mg) while the total dose of conventional group was 10,300 mg (range: 8,900-14,400 mg) (p = 0.0048 by Mann-Whitney U test). No adverse event related to dupilumab was recorded.ConclusionsDupilumab in addition to methylprednisolone and azathioprine seems superior to methylprednisolone/azathioprine alone in controlling disease progression and accelerating the tapering of glucocorticoids.
| S-EPMC8552038 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Multiple intravenous doses of ponezumab, an anti-amyloid antibody, were evaluated in subjects with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD). METHODS:In part A, 77 subjects were randomized to ponezumab 0.1, 0.5, or 1 mg/kg (75 treated) and 26 to placebo (24 treated). In part B, 63 subjects were randomized and treated with ponezumab 3 or 8.5 mg/kg and 32 with placebo. Subjects received 10 infusions over 18 months and were followed for 6 months thereafter. RESULTS:Ponezumab was generally safe and well tolerated. Most common adverse events were fall (16.7% ponezumab, 21.4% placebo), headache (13.8%, 21.4%), and cerebral microhemorrhage (13.8%, 19.6%). Plasma ponezumab increased dose-dependently with limited accumulation. Cerebrospinal fluid penetration was low. Plasma A?1-x and A?1-40 showed robust increases, but cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers showed no dose response. Ponezumab had no effects on cognitive/functional outcomes or brain volume. CONCLUSIONS:Multiple-dose ponezumab was generally safe, but not efficacious, in mild-to-moderate AD.
| S-EPMC5651443 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPsoriasis is a chronic immune-mediated inflammatory skin disease affecting both adults and children. To better understand the efficacy-safety profile of biologics in children with moderate-to-severe psoriasis, this study aimed to analyze efficacy and safety data of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) performed in pediatric psoriasis and to compare efficacy outcomes in children with those in adults.MethodsRCTs investigating biologics in children with moderate-to-severe psoriasis were identified in a systematic literature review. PASI75/90 treatment responses at weeks 11/12 were analyzed comparing biologics with control arms. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were analyzed at the end of each study. Efficacy data from RCTs in adults with psoriasis were selected for the same biologics. Risk ratios (RR) of selected RCTs were pooled together in a statistical random effects model using the inverse variance method.ResultsFor children, there were 1 etanercept, 2 secukinumab, 1 ixekizumab and 1 ustekinumab placebo-controlled RCTs and 1 adalimumab RCT using methotrexate as reference arm at weeks 11/12. For adults, out of 263 RCTs, 7 adalimumab and 15 etanercept (TNF inhibitors) and 4 ixekizumab and 12 ustekinumab (IL-17 and IL-12/23 inhibitors) RCTs reported PASI75/90 efficacy responses at weeks 11/12. Regarding efficacy, all biologics showed improved PASI responses over control arms. RRs ranges were 2.02-7.45 in PASI75 and 4.10-14.50 in PASI90. The highest PASI75 responses were seen for ustekinumab 0.375 mg/kg (RR = 7.25, 95% CI 2.83-18.58) and ustekinumab 0.75 mg/kg (RR = 7.45, 95% CI 2.91-19.06) in the CADMUS study. The highest PASI90 response was seen for ixekizumab (RR = 14.50, 95% CI 4.82-43.58) in the IXORA-PEDS study. SAE incidences in pediatric and adult arms with biologics were 0 to 3% except for a pediatric arm with adalimumab 0.40 mg/kg (8%). For adults, pooled RR also showed improved PASI responses over placebo for all biologics, with highest PASI75 response observed for ixekizumab (pooled RR = 16.18, 95% CI 11.83-22.14).ConclusionBoth adults and children with psoriasis show superior efficacy with biologics compared to control arms after 3 months of treatment with SAE incidences in the low percentages. Additional longer-term clinical studies are warranted to fully understand the overall efficacy-safety profile of biologics in children with moderate-to-severe psoriasis.
| S-EPMC9548699 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundUsing a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), this study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of pemafibrate, a novel selective peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor α modulator, in patients with dyslipidemia.MethodsA search was performed using the MEDLINE, Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases. We decided to employ RCTs to evaluate the effects of pemafibrate on lipid and glucose metabolism-related parameters in patients with dyslipidemia. For statistical analysis, standardized mean difference (SMD) or odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the random effect model.ResultsOur search yielded seven RCTs (with a total of 1623 patients) that satisfied the eligibility criteria of this study; hence, those studies were incorporated into this meta-analysis. The triglyceride concentration significantly decreased in the pemafibrate group (SMD, - 1.38; 95% CI, - 1.63 to - 1.12; P < 0.001) than in the placebo group, with a reduction effect similar to that exhibited by fenofibrate. Compared with the placebo group, the pemafibrate group also showed improvements in high-density and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels as well as in homeostasis model assessment for insulin resistance. Furthermore, the pemafibrate group showed a significant decrease in hepatobiliary enzyme activity compared with the placebo and fenofibrate groups; and, total adverse events (AEs) were significantly lower in the pemafibrate group than in the fenofibrate group (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.49-0.73; P < 0.001). In contrast, the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level was significantly higher in the pemafibrate group than in the placebo (P = 0.006) and fenofibrate (P < 0.001) groups.ConclusionsThe lipid profile significantly improved in the pemafibrate group than in the placebo group. In addition to the pemafibrate group having an improved lipid profile, which was comparable with that of the fenofibrate group, the AEs were significantly lower than in the fenofibrate group and an improvement in hepatobiliary enzyme activity was also recognized. However, we believe that actual clinical data as well as long-term efficacy and safety need to be investigated in the future.
| S-EPMC6429757 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Single risk factors, such as hypertension and dyslipidemia, can combine to exacerbate the development and severity of cardiovascular disease. Treatment goals may be more effectively achieved if multiple disease factors are targeted with combination treatment. We enrolled 202 patients who were randomly divided into the following three groups: telmisartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg + rosuvastatin 20 mg, telmisartan 80 mg + rosuvastatin 20 mg, and telmisartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg. The primary efficacy variables were changes from baseline in mean sitting systolic blood pressure (MSSBP) between telmisartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg + rosuvastatin 20 mg and telmisartan 80 mg + rosuvastatin 20 mg at 8 weeks, and the percent changes from baseline in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol between telmisartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg + rosuvastatin 20 mg and telmisartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg at 8 weeks. The secondary efficacy variables were changes in MSSBP, mean sitting diastolic blood pressure (MSDBP), LDL cholesterol and other lipid levels at 4 weeks and 8 weeks, as well as observed adverse events during follow-up. There were no significant differences between the three groups in demographic characteristics and no significant difference among the three groups in terms of baseline characteristics for the validity evaluation variables. The mean overall treatment compliance in the three groups was, respectively, 98.42%, 96.68%, and 98.12%, indicating strong compliance for all patients. The Least-Square (LS) mean (SE) for changes in MSSBP in the two (telmisartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg + rosuvastatin 20 mg and telmisartan 80 mg + rosuvastatin 20 mg) groups were -19.3 (2.68) mm Hg and -6.69 (2.76) mm Hg. The difference between the two groups was significant (-12.60 (2.77) mm Hg, 95% CI -18.06 to -7.14, P < .0001). The LS Mean for the percent changes from baseline in LDL cholesterol in the two (telmisartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg + rosuvastatin 20 mg and telmisartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg) groups were -52.45 (3.23) % and 2.68 (3.15) %. The difference between the two groups was significant (-55.13 (3.20) %, 95% CI -61.45 to -48.81, P < .0001). There were no adverse events leading to discontinuation or death. Combined administration of telmisartan/amlodipine 80/5 mg and rosuvastatin 20 mg for the treatment of hypertensive patients with dyslipidemia significantly reduces blood pressure and improves lipid control. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03067688.
| S-EPMC7692919 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Hypertension and dyslipidemia are major risk factors of cardiovascular disease (CVD) events. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the co-administration of fimasartan and rosuvastatin in patients with hypertension and hypercholesterolemia. METHODS:We conducted a randomized double-blind and parallel-group trial. Patients who met eligible criteria after 4 weeks of therapeutic life change were randomly assigned to the following groups. 1) co-administration of fimasartan 120 mg/rosuvastatin 20 mg (FMS/RSV), 2) fimasartan 120 mg (FMS) alone 3) rosuvastatin 20 mg (RSV) alone. Drugs were administered once daily for 8 weeks. RESULTS:Of 140 randomized patients, 135 for whom efficacy data were available were analyzed. After 8 weeks of treatment, the FMS/RSV treatment group showed greater reductions in sitting systolic (siSBP) and diastolic (siDBP) blood pressures than those in the group receiving RSV alone (both p?<?0.001). Reductions in siSBP and siDBP were not significantly different between the FMS/RSV and FMS alone groups (p?=?0.500 and p?=?0.734, respectively). After 8 weeks of treatment, FMS/RSV treatment showed greater efficacy in percentage reduction of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level from baseline than that shown by FMS alone treatment (p?<?0.001). The response rates of siSBP with FMS/RSV, FMS alone, and RSV alone treatments were 65.22, 55.56, and 34.09%, respectively (FMS/RSV vs. RSV, p?=?0.006). The LDL-C goal attainment rates with FMS/RSV, RSV alone, and FMS alone treatments were 80.43%, 81.82%, and 15.56%, respectively (FMS/RSV vs. FMS, p?<?0.001). Incidence of adverse drug reactions with FMS/RSV treatment was 8.33%, which was similar to those associated with FMS and RSV alone treatments. CONCLUSION:This study demonstrated that the co-administration of fimasartan and rosuvastatin to patients with both hypertension and hypercholesterolemia was efficacious and safe. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02166814 . 16 June 2014.
| S-EPMC5217661 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDyslipidemia is a major risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and a leading cause of death worldwide. The clinical utility of commonly used lipid-lowering drugs such as statins and fibrates is sometimes limited by the occurrence of various adverse reactions. Recently, berberine (BBR) has received increasing attention as a safer and more cost-effective option to manage dyslipidemia. Thus, a high-quality randomized controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of BBR in the treatment of dyslipidemia is deemed necessary.Methods/designThis is a randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled clinical trial. A total of 118 patients with dyslipidemia will be enrolled in this study and randomized into two groups at a ratio of 1:1. BBR or placebo will be taken orally for 12 weeks. The primary outcome is the percentage of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol reduction at week 12. Other outcome measures include changes in other lipid profiles, high sensitivity C-reactive protein, blood pressure, body weight, Bristol Stool Chart, traditional Chinese medicine symptom form, adipokine profiles, and metagenomics of intestinal microbiota. Safety assessment includes general physical examination, blood and urine routine test, liver and kidney function test, and adverse events.DiscussionThis trial may provide high-quality evidence on the efficacy and safety of BBR for dyslipidemia. Importantly, the findings of this trial will help to identify patient and disease characteristics that may predict favorable outcomes of treatment with BBR and optimize its indication for clinical use.Trial registrationChinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR1900021361 . Registered on 17 February 2019.
| S-EPMC7825207 | biostudies-literature