Dataset Information

Escitalopram for agitation in Alzheimer's disease (S-CitAD): Methods and design of an investigator-initiated, randomized, controlled, multicenter clinical trial.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a disabling, common cause of dementia, and agitation is one of the most common and distressing symptoms for patients with AD. Escitalopram for agitation in Alzheimer's disease (S-CitAD) tests a novel, clinically derived therapeutic approach to treat agitation in patients with AD.

Methods

S-CitAD is a NIH-funded, investigator-initiated, randomized, multicenter clinical trial. Participants receive a structured psychosocial intervention (PSI) as standard of care. Participants without sufficient response to PSI are randomized to receive 15 mg escitalopram/day or a matching placebo in addition to PSI. Primary outcome is the Modified Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study - Clinical Global Impression of Change (mADCS-CGIC).

Discussion

S-CitAD will provide information about a practical, immediately available approach to treating agitation in patients with AD. S-CitAD may become a model of how to evaluate and predict treatment response in patients with AD and agitation as a neuropsychiatric symptom (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03108846).

SUBMITTER: Ehrhardt S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6889953 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Escitalopram for agitation in Alzheimer's disease (S-CitAD): Methods and design of an investigator-initiated, randomized, controlled, multicenter clinical trial.

Ehrhardt Stephan S Porsteinsson Anton P AP Munro Cynthia A CA Rosenberg Paul B PB Pollock Bruce G BG Devanand Davangere P DP Mintzer Jacobo J Rajji Tarek K TK Ismail Zahinoor Z Schneider Lon S LS Baksh Sheriza N SN Drye Lea T LT Avramopoulos Dimitri D Shade David M DM Lyketsos Constantine G CG

Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association 20191003 11

<h4>Introduction</h4>Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a disabling, common cause of dementia, and agitation is one of the most common and distressing symptoms for patients with AD. Escitalopram for agitation in Alzheimer's disease (S-CitAD) tests a novel, clinically derived therapeutic approach to treat agitation in patients with AD.<h4>Methods</h4>S-CitAD is a NIH-funded, investigator-initiated, randomized, multicenter clinical trial. Participants receive a structured psychosocial intervention (PSI) ...[more]

PMID: 31587995

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveIn children many antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are prescribed off-label due to a lack of well-designed randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We conducted a multicenter RCT in the Netherlands to compare levetiracetam and valproic acid as monotherapy in children with newly diagnosed epilepsy. After 2 years, we had to stop this investigator-initiated trial prematurely because the inclusion rate was too low. We analyzed the reasons for this failure, assessed the various issues involved in performing RCTs in children, and now give recommendations for future studies.MethodsA questionnaire was completed by all investigators involved in the study. It included questions about the motivation to participate and the perceived reasons for recruitment failure. We also studied literature about financial, logistic, legal, and ethical aspects of RCTs in children.ResultsMain reasons for recruitment failure were overestimation of the number of eligible AED-naive children referred by general pediatricians; personal preferences of investigators for specific antiepileptic drugs; and the extensive administrative load due to extra regulations and guidelines for children. Fundraising for investigator-initiated trials is difficult and the majority of RCTs concerning AEDs are sponsored by pharmaceutical companies. Involving children requires balancing between protection and participation; the randomization procedure and obtaining informed consent are complex for both children and parents.SignificancePerforming RCTs with AEDs in children is important but complicated by logistic, regulatory, legal, and ethical restrictions. Based on our recent experience, our advice to colleagues who are planning a similar trial would be to perform a feasibility pilot study; to set up intensive collaboration with referring pediatricians; to arrange support of a clinical trials unit and a local research nurse during the complete trial period; and to incorporate the possibility of extending the recruitment period. Major investments, both financially from governmental organizations and in time, are imperative for independent RCTs in children.

Project description:ObjectiveT cells play a key role in the pathogenesis of early systemic sclerosis. This study was undertaken to assess the safety and efficacy of abatacept in patients with diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis (dcSSc).MethodsIn this 12-month, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, participants were randomized 1:1 to receive either subcutaneous abatacept 125 mg or matching placebo, stratified by duration of dcSSc. Escape therapy was allowed at 6 months for worsening disease. The coprimary end points were change in the modified Rodnan skin thickness score (MRSS) compared to baseline and safety over 12 months. Differences in longitudinal outcomes were assessed according to treatment using linear mixed models, with outcomes censored after initiation of escape therapy. Skin tissue obtained from participants at baseline was classified into intrinsic gene expression subsets.ResultsAmong 88 participants, the adjusted mean change in the MRSS at 12 months was -6.24 units for those receiving abatacept and -4.49 units for those receiving placebo, with an adjusted mean treatment difference of -1.75 units (P = 0.28). Outcomes for 2 secondary measures (Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index and a composite measure) were clinically and statistically significantly better with abatacept. The proportion of subjects in whom escape therapy was needed was higher in the placebo group relative to the abatacept group (36% versus 16%). In the inflammatory and normal-like skin gene expression subsets, decline in the MRSS over 12 months was clinically and significantly greater in the abatacept group versus the placebo group (P < 0.001 and P = 0.03, respectively). In the abatacept group, adverse events occurred in 35 participants versus 40 participants in the placebo group, including 2 deaths and 1 death, respectively.ConclusionIn this phase II trial, abatacept was well-tolerated, but change in the MRSS was not statistically significant. Secondary outcome measures, including gene expression subsets, showed evidence in support of abatacept. These data should be confirmed in a phase III trial.

Project description:Despite the recent advances in cancer treatment, the therapeutic options for patients with biliary tract cancer are still very limited and the prognosis very poor. More than 50% of newly diagnosed patients with biliary tract cancer are not amenable to curative surgical treatment and thus treated with palliative systemic treatment. Malignant bile duct obstructions in patients with perihilar and/or ductal cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) represents one of the most important challenges in the management of these patients, owning to the risk represented by developing life-threatening cholangitis which, in turn, limits the use of systemic treatment. For this reason, endoscopic stenting and/or bile duct decompression is the mainstay of treatment of these patients. Data on efficacy and safety of adding radiofrequency ablation (RFA) to biliary stenting is not conclusive. The aim of this multicenter, randomized trial is to evaluate the effect of intraductal RFA prior to bile duct stenting in patients with unresectable perihilar or ductal CCA undergoing palliative systemic therapy. ACTICCA-2 is a multicenter, randomized, controlled, open-label, investigator-initiated trial. 120 patients with perihilar or ductal CCA with indication for biliary stenting and systemic therapy will be randomized 1:1 to receive either RFA plus bile duct stenting (interventional arm) or bile duct stenting alone (control arm). Patients will be stratified by trial site and tumor location (perihilar vs. ductal). Both arms receive palliative systemic treatment according to the local standard of care determined by a multidisciplinary tumorboard. The primary endpoint is time to first biliary event, which is determined by an increase of bilirubin to > 5 mg/dl and/or the occurrence of cholangitis leading to premature stent replacement and/or disruption of chemotherapy. Secondary endpoints include overall survival, safety according to NCI CTCAE v5, quality of life assessed by questionnaires (EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BIL21), clinical event rate at 6 months after RFA and total days of over-night stays in hospital. Follow-up for the primary endpoint will be 6 months, while survival assessment will be continued until end of study (maximum follow-up 30 month). All patients who are randomized and who underwent endoscopic stenting will be used for the primary endpoint analysis which will be conducted using a cause-specific Cox proportional hazards model with a frailty for trial site and fixed effects for the treatment group, tumor location, and stent material. ACTICCA-2 is a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial to assess efficacy and safety of adding biliary RFA to bile duct stenting in patients with CCA receiving palliative systemic treatment. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06175845) and approved by the local ethics committee in Hamburg, Germany (2024-101232-BO-ff). This manuscript reflects protocol version 1 as of January 9th, 2024.

Project description:Background & aimsAntidepressants are frequently prescribed to treat functional dyspepsia (FD), a common disorder characterized by upper abdominal symptoms, including discomfort or postprandial fullness. However, there is little evidence of the efficacy of these drugs in patients with FD. We performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the effects of antidepressant therapy on symptoms, gastric emptying (GE), and meal-induced satiety in patients with FD.MethodsWe performed a study at 8 North American sites of patients who met the Rome II criteria for FD and did not have depression or use antidepressants. Patients (n = 292; 44 ± 15 years old, 75% were female, 70% with dysmotility-like FD, and 30% with ulcer-like FD) were randomly assigned to groups given placebo, 50 mg amitriptyline, or 10 mg escitalopram for 10 weeks. The primary end point was adequate relief of FD symptoms for ≥5 weeks of the last 10 weeks (of 12). Secondary end points included GE time, maximum tolerated volume in Nutrient Drink Test, and FD-related quality of life.ResultsAn adequate relief response was reported by 39 subjects given placebo (40%), 51 given amitriptyline (53%), and 37 given escitalopram (38%) (P = .05, after treatment, adjusted for baseline balancing factors including all subjects). Subjects with ulcer-like FD given amitriptyline were >3-fold more likely to report adequate relief than those given placebo (odds ratio = 3.1; 95% confidence interval: 1.1-9.0). Neither amitriptyline nor escitalopram appeared to affect GE or meal-induced satiety after the 10-week period in any group. Subjects with delayed GE were less likely to report adequate relief than subjects with normal GE (odds ratio = 0.4; 95% confidence interval: 0.2-0.8). Both antidepressants improved overall quality of life.ConclusionsAmitriptyline, but not escitalopram, appears to benefit some patients with FD, particularly those with ulcer-like (painful) FD. Patients with delayed GE do not respond to these drugs. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT00248651.

Project description:BackgroundHealthcare decisions are ideally based on clinical trial results, published in study registries, as journal articles or summarized in secondary research articles. In this research project, we investigated the impact of academically and commercially sponsored clinical trials on medical practice by measuring the proportion of trials published and cited by systematic reviews and clinical guidelines.MethodsWe examined 691 multicenter, randomized controlled trials that started in 2005 or later and were completed by the end of 2016. To determine whether sponsorship/funding and place of conduct influence a trial's impact, we created four sub-cohorts of investigator initiated trials (IITs) and industry sponsored trials (ISTs): 120 IITs and 171 ISTs with German contribution compared to 200 IITs and 200 ISTs without German contribution. We balanced the groups for study phase and place of conduct. German IITs were funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG), the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), or by another non-commercial research organization. All other trials were drawn from the German Clinical Trials Register or ClinicalTrials.gov. We investigated, to what extent study characteristics were associated with publication and impact using multivariable logistic regressions.ResultsFor 80% of the 691 trials, results were published as result articles in a medical journal and/or study registry, 52% were cited by a systematic review, and 26% reached impact in a clinical guideline. Drug trials and larger trials were associated with a higher probability to be published and to have an impact than non-drug trials and smaller trials. Results of IITs were more often published as a journal article while results of ISTs were more often published in study registries. International ISTs less often gained impact by inclusion in systematic reviews or guidelines than IITs.ConclusionAn encouraging high proportion of the clinical trials were published, and a considerable proportion gained impact on clinical practice. However, there is still room for improvement. For publishing study results, study registries have become an alternative or complement to journal articles, especially for ISTs. IITs funded by governmental bodies in Germany reached an impact that is comparable to international IITs and ISTs.

Project description:BackgroundMajor depressive disorder (MDD) is a prevalent and disabling disorder that can lead to heavy individual, familial, and societal burdens. Although pharmaceutical interventions still play an essential role in therapeutic measures, limitations, including effects that are delayed for weeks, are noteworthy. Antidepressants with rapid efficacy and acceptable tolerance have been investigated for many years; rapid antidepressant effects and promising clinical applications have been obtained with intravenous and oral scopolamine. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of repeated intramuscular scopolamine as an add-on treatment to escitalopram.MethodsThis is a single-center, saline-controlled, double-blind, three-armed, randomized trial. Sixty-six participants diagnosed with MDD will be recruited at Beijing Anding Hospital and randomly assigned to one of three groups: a high-dose intramuscular scopolamine augmentation group; a low-dose intramuscular scopolamine augmentation group; and a placebo control group. Our primary endpoint is improvement in the 17-Item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD17) score from the baseline (at least a 20% reduction). Prespecified secondary endpoints include response rates and remission rates as well as changes in the total or subscale scores between the baseline and week 4.DiscussionThis study will provide the first insight regarding the rapid antidepressant efficacy and tolerability of an intramuscular scopolamine add-on to the usual treatment in Chinese MDD patients. The first discussion concerns whether augmentation can accelerate early antidepressant efficacy. A pilot study of intramuscular scopolamine is performed. The limitations of this study include its small sample size and it being a single-center study, suggesting the need for further confirmation with trials enrolling larger populations.Ethics and disseminationThe study protocol and all related materials have been approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee of the Beijing Anding Hospital (No. 2016-106, Beijing, China). The findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and at national and international conferences.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03131050 . Registered on 18 April 2017.

Dataset Information

Escitalopram for agitation in Alzheimer's disease (S-CitAD): Methods and design of an investigator-initiated, randomized, controlled, multicenter clinical trial.

Introduction

Methods

Discussion

Publications

Escitalopram for agitation in Alzheimer's disease (S-CitAD): Methods and design of an investigator-initiated, randomized, controlled, multicenter clinical trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets