Search

Objective: Women with pre-eclampsia have elevated circulating levels of soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase-1 (sFlt-1). Statins can reduce sFlt-1 from cultured cells and improve pregnancy outcome in animals with a pre-eclampsia-like syndrome. We investigated the effect of pravastatin on plasma sFlt-1 levels during pre-eclampsia.Design: Blinded (clinician and participant), proof of principle, placebo-controlled trial.Setting: Fifteen UK maternity units.Population: We used a minimisation algorithm to assign 62 women with early-onset pre-eclampsia (24+0 -31+6  weeks of gestation) to receive pravastatin 40 mg daily (n = 30) or matched placebo (n = 32), from randomisation to childbirth.Primary Outcome: Difference in mean plasma sFlt-1 levels over the first 3 days following randomisation.Results: The difference in the mean maternal plasma sFlt-1 levels over the first 3 days after randomisation between the pravastatin (n = 27) and placebo (n = 29) groups was 292 pg/ml (95% CI -1175 to 592; P = 0.5), and over days 1-14 was 48 pg/ml (95% CI -1009 to 913; P = 0.9). Women who received pravastatin had a similar length of pregnancy following randomisation compared with those who received placebo (hazard ratio 0.84; 95% CI 0.50-1.40; P = 0.6). The median time from randomisation to childbirth was 9 days (interquartile range [IQR] 5-14 days) for the pravastatin group and 7 days (IQR 4-11 days) for the placebo group. There were three perinatal deaths in the placebo-treated group and no deaths or serious adverse events attributable to pravastatin.Conclusions: We found no evidence that pravastatin lowered maternal plasma sFlt-1 levels once early-onset pre-eclampsia had developed. Pravastatin appears to have no adverse perinatal effects.Tweetable Abstract: Pravastatin does not improve maternal plasma sFlt-1 or placental growth factor levels following a diagnosis of early preterm pre-eclampsia #clinicaltrial finds. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common type of arthritis, causing significant joint pain and disability. It is already a major cause of healthcare expenditure and its incidence will further increase with the ageing population. Current treatments for OA have major limitations and new analgesic treatments are needed. Synovitis is prevalent in OA and is associated with pain. Hydroxychloroquine is used in routine practice for treating synovitis in inflammatory arthritides, such as rheumatoid arthritis. We propose that treating patients with symptomatic hand OA with hydroxychloroquine will be a practical and safe treatment to reduce synovitis and pain. Methods/design: HERO is an investigator-initiated, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. A total of 252 subjects with symptomatic hand OA will be recruited across primary and secondary care sites in the UK and randomized on a 1:1 basis to active treatment or placebo for 12 months. Daily medication dose will range from 200 to 400 mg according to ideal body weight. The primary endpoint is change in average hand pain during the previous two weeks (measured on a numerical rating scale (NRS)) between baseline and six months. Secondary endpoints include other self-reported pain, function and quality-of-life measures and radiographic structural change at 12 months. A health economics analysis will also be performed. An ultrasound substudy will be conducted to examine baseline levels of synovitis. Linear and logistic regression will be used to compare changes between groups using univariable and multivariable modelling analyses. All analyses will be conducted on an intention-to -treat basis. Discussion: The HERO trial is designed to examine whether hydroxychloroquine is an effective analgesic treatment for OA and whether it provides any long-term structural benefit. The ultrasound substudy will address whether baseline synovitis is a predictor of therapeutic response. This will potentially provide a new treatment for OA, which could be of particular use in the primary care setting. Trial registration: ISRCTN91859104. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Context: Lofexidine is an alpha-2-adrenergic receptor agonist that is approved in the United Kingdom for the treatment of opioid withdrawal symptoms. Lofexidine has been reported to have more significant effects on decreasing opioid withdrawal symptoms with less hypotension than clonidine. Objective: To demonstrate that lofexidine is well tolerated and effective in the alleviation of observationally defined opioid withdrawal symptoms in opioid dependent individuals undergoing medically supervised opioid detoxification as compared to placebo. Design: An inpatient, Phase 3, placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized multi-site trial with three phases: (1) opioid agonist stabilization phase (days 1–3), (2) detoxification/medication or placebo phase (days 4–8), and (3) post detoxification/medication phase (days 9–11). Subjects: Sixty-eight opioid dependent subjects were enrolled at three sites with 35 randomized to lofexidine and 33 to placebo. Main outcome measure: Modified Himmelsbach Opiate Withdrawal Scale (MHOWS) on study day 5 (second opioid detoxification treatment day). Results: Due to significant findings, the study was terminated early. On the study day 5 MHOWS, subjects treated with lofexidine had significantly lower scores (equating to fewer/less severe withdrawal symptoms) than placebo subjects (least squares means 19.5±2.1 versus 30.9±2.7; p =0.0019). Lofexidine subjects had significantly better retention in treatment than placebo subjects (38.2% versus 15.2%; Log rank test p =0.01). Conclusions: Lofexidine is well tolerated and more efficacious than placebo for reducing opioid withdrawal symptoms in inpatients undergoing medically supervised opioid detoxification. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Trial Design: We present a study protocol for a multi-centre, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial that seeks to test the feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness of a 52-week period of treatment with the first-in-class co-stimulatory blocker abatacept for preventing or delaying the onset of inflammatory arthritis.Methods: The study aimed to recruit 206 male or female subjects from the secondary care hospital setting across the UK and the Netherlands. Participants who were at least 18 years old, who reported inflammatory sounding joint pain (clinically suspicious arthralgia) and who were found to be positive for serum autoantibodies associated with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) were eligible for enrolment. All study subjects were randomly assigned to receive weekly injections of investigational medicinal product, either abatacept or placebo treatment over the course of a 52-week period. Participants were followed up for a further 52 weeks. The primary endpoint was defined as the time to development of at least three swollen joints or to the fulfilment of the 2010 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) classification criteria for RA using swollen but not tender joints, whichever endpoint was met first. In either case, swollen joints were confirmed by ultrasonography. Participants, care givers, and those assessing the outcomes were all blinded to group assignment. Clinical assessors and ultrasonographers were also blinded to each other's assessments for the duration of the study.Conclusions: There is limited experience of the design and implementation of trials for the prevention of inflammatory joint diseases. We discuss the rationale behind choice and duration of treatment and the challenges associated with defining the "at risk" state and offer pragmatic solutions in the protocol to enrolling subjects at risk of RA.Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trials, ID: ISRCTN46017566 . Registered on 4 July 2014. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Venous leg ulcers (VLUs) can take many months to heal and 25% fail to heal. The main treatment for venous leg ulcers is compression therapy and few additional therapies exist. Two previous trials indicated that low-dose aspirin may improve healing time, but these trials were insufficiently robust., Methods: A multi-centred, pilot, phase II, randomised, double blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, efficacy trial (RCT) was conducted to determine: if aspirin improves VLU healing time; the safety of aspirin in this population; treatment compliance; and the feasibility of recruitment to a phase III trial. We recruited patients from secondary care who were aged ≥ 18 years, had a chronic VLU and not regularly taking aspirin. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 300 mg of daily aspirin or placebo in addition to standard care, which consisted of multi component compression therapy aiming to deliver 40 mmHg at the ankle where possible. The randomisation list was stratified by ulcer size (≤ 5 cm 2 or > 5 cm 2 ). The primary endpoint was time to ulcer healing, which was defined as 'complete epithelial healing in the absence of scab (eschar) with no dressing required'. Safety outcomes were assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of the study drug., Results: Twenty-seven patients were recruited from eight sites (target 100 patients). A short time-frame to recruit and a large number of patients failing to meet the eligibility criteria were the main barriers to recruitment. There was no evidence of a difference in time to healing of the reference ulcer following adjustment for log ulcer area and duration (hazard ratio 0.58, 95% confidence interval 0.18 to 1.85; p = 0.357). One expected serious adverse event related to aspirin was recorded. A number of options to improve recruitment were explored., Conclusions: There was no evidence that aspirin was effective in expediting the healing of chronic VLUs. However, the analysis was underpowered due to the low number of participants recruited. The trial design would require substantial amendment in order to progress to a phase III (effectiveness) trial., Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02333123. Registered on 5 November 2014.