SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “PLACEBOS”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 667 records · Page 37Linked to original sources

PubMed1996

Comparison of fluvoxamine, imipramine, and placebo in the treatment of outpatients with panic disorder.

Fluvoxamine and imipramine were compared to placebo in an 8-week doubleblind randomized multicentre trial comprising of 148 outpatients between 19 and 57 years of age (mean: 35) with a DSM-III-R diagnosis of Panic Disorder. mean daily dose at endpoint was: fluvoxamine, 171.4 mg; imipramine 164.7 mg. The mean number of panic attacks per week at baseline were 10.9, 14.4 and 6.5 for fluvoxamine, imipramine and placebo, respectively. The intent-to-treat analysis of the change from baseline (difference score) of the number of panic attacks at endpoint revealed: a difference of 3.3 attacks (95% CI: -0.3, 6.8) between fluvoxamine and placebo and a difference of 6.0 attacks (95% CI: 1.5, 10.5) between imipramine and placebo. Treatment was stopped prematurely in 31 (62%) on fluvoxamine, 16 (33%) on imipramine and 29 (58%) on placebo. The number of patients withdrawing due to intolerance was 13 (26%) for fluvoxamine, 10 (21%) for imipramine and 4 (8%) for placebo. The number of patients withdrawing due to lack of efficacy was 10 (20%) for fluvoxamine, 4 (8%) for imipramine and 12 (24%) for placebo. Overall, this study demonstrated that fluvoxamine was not effective in the treatment of panic disorder but did show a strong effect for imipramine. A chance occurrence of significantly fewer number of panic attacks in the placebo group at baseline may limit the conclusions of this study.

Adult↗

PubMed1998

Symptomatic efficacy of avocado/soybean unsaponifiables in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee and hip: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter clinical trial with a six-month treatment period and a two-month followup demonstrating a persistent effect.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of avocado/soybean unsaponifiables (ASU) in the treatment of patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee or hip, as well as the potential residual effects of ASU after stopping treatment, to determine whether ASU might be a symptomatic slow-acting drug for the treatment of OA. METHODS: One hundred sixty-four patients with regular, painful, primary OA of the knee (n = 114) or hip (n = 50) entered a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicenter trial with a 6-month treatment period and a 2-month posttreatment followup. A 15-day washout period for nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) preceded the study. Efficacy was judged according to 1) Lequesne's functional index (LFI) and 2) pain on Huskisson's visual analog scale (VAS; 100-mm scale), intake of NSAIDs/analgesics, and overall disability score (by 100-mm VAS). RESULTS: Eighty-five patients received ASU; 79 received placebo. One hundred forty-four patients were evaluable at month 6 (75 taking ASU; 69 taking placebo). The mean +/- SEM LFI score decreased from 9.7 +/- 0.3 to 6.8 +/- 0.4 in the ASU group and from 9.4 +/- 0.3 to 8.9 +/- 0.4 in the placebo group (P < 0.001 for intergroup difference at month 6). Pain decreased from 56.1 +/- 1.6 mm to 35.3 +/- 2.3 in the ASU group and from 56.1 +/- 1.8 mm to 45.7 +/- 2.6 in the placebo group (P = 0.003 at month 6). NSAID consumption was slightly lower in the ASU group. Fewer patients in the ASU group required NSAIDs (48%, versus 63% in the placebo group; P = 0.054). The success rate was 39% in the ASU group and 18% in the placebo group. Overall functional disability was significantly reduced in the ASU group. Improvement appeared more marked in patients with hip OA. A residual effect was observed at month 8. Tolerance was good to excellent for most patients. CONCLUSION: ASU treatment showed significant symptomatic efficacy over placebo in the treatment of OA, acting from month 2 and showing a persistent effect after the end of treatment.

Aged↗

PubMed2001

A randomized, controlled trial of methotrexate versus placebo in early diffuse scleroderma.

OBJECTIVE: Early diffuse scleroderma (systemic sclerosis; SSc) has no proven treatment. This study was undertaken to examine the efficacy of methotrexate (MTX) in improving the skin and other disease parameters in early diffuse SSc. METHODS: Seventy-one patients with diffuse SSc of <3 years' duration were enrolled in a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial. Thirty-five patients were treated with MTX and 36 with placebo. Treatment was administered for 12 months. The primary outcome measures were skin score (as determined with 2 different indices) and physician global assessment. RESULTS: At baseline, there were no statistically significant differences in skin scores, carbon monoxide diffusing capacity (DLco), physician global assessment, or other secondary outcome measurements between the 2 treatment groups. At study completion, results slightly favored the MTX group (mean +/- SEM modified Rodnan skin score 21.4+/-2.8 in the MTX group versus 26.3+/-2.1 in the placebo group [P < 0.17]; UCLA skin score 8.8+/-1.2 in the MTX group versus 11.0+/-0.9 in the placebo group [P < 0.15]; DLco in the MTX group 75.7+/-4.6 versus 61.8+/-3.4 in the placebo group [P < 0.2]). In addition, physician global assessment results favored MTX (P < 0.035), whereas patient global assessment did not differ significantly between groups. When between-group differences for changes in scores from baseline to 12 months were examined using intent-to-treat methodology, MTX appeared to have a favorable effect on skin scores (modified Rodnan score -4.3 in the MTX group versus 1.8 in the placebo group [P < 0.009]; UCLA score -1.2 in the MTX group versus 1.2 in the placebo group [P < 0.02]), but differences in the degree of change in the DLco and physician global assessment were not significant. For the UCLA skin score, these differences in results were not statistically significant after adjustment for baseline differences in sex distribution and steroid use. Dropout rates were similar in the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: Although results of this trial demonstrated a trend in favor of MTX versus placebo in the treatment of early diffuse SSc, the between-group differences were small and the power to rule out false-negative results was only 50%. Our findings do not provide evidence that MTX is significantly effective in the treatment of early diffuse SSc.

Disability Evaluation↗

PubMed2001

Evaluation of the structure-modifying effects of diacerein in hip osteoarthritis: ECHODIAH, a three-year, placebo-controlled trial. Evaluation of the Chondromodulating Effect of Diacerein in OA of the Hip.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ability of diacerein, an interleukin-1beta inhibitor, to slow the progressive decrease in joint space width observed in patients with hip osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled 3-year study, 507 patients with primary OA of the hip (by the American College of Rheumatology criteria) received diacerein (50 mg twice a day) or placebo. The minimal hip joint space width was measured by a central reader on yearly pelvic radiographs, using a 0.1-mm-graduated magnifying glass. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were comparable in the 2 treatment groups (255 patients receiving diacerein, 252 receiving placebo); 238 patients (47%) discontinued the study, mainly because of adverse events in the diacerein group (25% versus 12% with placebo) and because of inefficacy in the placebo group (14% versus 7% with diacerein). The percentage of patients with radiographic progression, defined by a joint space loss of at least 0.5 mm, was significantly lower in patients receiving diacerein than in patients receiving placebo, both in the intent-to-treat analysis and in the completer analysis (50.7% versus 60.4% [P = 0.036] and 47.3% versus 62.3% [P = 0.007], respectively). In those patients who completed 3 years of treatment, the rate of joint space narrowing was significantly lower with diacerein (mean +/- SD 0.18 +/- 0.25 mm/year versus 0.23 +/- 0.23 mm/year with placebo; P = 0.042). Diacerein had no evident effect on the symptoms of OA in this study. However, a post hoc covariate analysis that took into account the use of analgesics and antiinflammatory drugs showed an effect of diacerein on the Lequesne functional index. Diacerein was well tolerated during the 3-year study. The most frequent adverse events were transient changes in bowel habits. CONCLUSION: This study confirms previous clinical findings indicating that the demonstration of a structure-modifying effect in hip OA is feasible, and shows, for the first time, that treatment with diacerein for 3 years has a significant structure-modifying effect as compared with placebo, coupled with a good safety profile. The clinical relevance of these findings requires further investigation.

Anthraquinones↗

PubMed2004

Escitalopram in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder: double-blind, placebo controlled, flexible-dose study.

Escitalopram has been shown in clinical trials to improve anxiety symptoms associated with depression, panic disorder, and social anxiety disorder. This study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of escitalopram in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). Outpatients (18 years or older) who met DSM-IV criteria for GAD, with baseline Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAMA) scores > or = 18, were randomly assigned to double blind treatment with escitalopram (10 mg/day for the first 4 weeks and then flexibly dosed from 10-20 mg/day) or placebo for 8 weeks, following a 1-week, single-blind, placebo lead-in period. The primary efficacy variable was the mean change from baseline in total HAMA score at Week 8. The escitalopram group (N = 158) showed a statistically significant, and clinically relevant, greater improvement at endpoint compared with placebo (N = 157) in all prospectively defined efficacy parameters. Significant improvement in HAMA total score and HAMA psychic anxiety subscale score for the escitalopram-treated group vs. the placebo-treated group was observed beginning at Week 1 and at each study visit thereafter. Mean changes from baseline to Week 8 on the HAMA total score using a last-observation-carried-forward (LOCF) approach were -11.3 for escitalopram and -7.4 for placebo (P<.001). Response rates at Week 8 were 68% for escitalopram and 41% for placebo (P<.01) for completers, and 58% for escitalopram and 38% for placebo LOCF values (P<.01). Treatment with escitalopram was well tolerated, with low rates of reported adverse events and an incidence of discontinuation due to adverse events not statistically different from placebo (8.9% vs. 5.1%; P=.27). Escitalopram 10-20 mg/day is effective, safe, and well tolerated in the treatment of patients with GAD.

Adolescent↗

PubMed1998

Dose-ranging study of mesalamine (PENTASA) enemas in the treatment of acute ulcerative proctosigmoiditis: results of a multicentered placebo-controlled trial. The U.S. PENTASA Enema Study Group.

The safety and efficacy of mesalamine enemas were determined ina dose-ranging study enrolling 287 patients with ulcerative proctitis and proctosigmoiditis in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial. Patients were randomized to receive placebo, 1, 2, or 4 g in 100 ml mesalamine (PENTASA) enemas h.s. for 8 weeks. Efficacy was assessed by clinical, sigmoidoscopic, and histologic improvement, as well as by induction of remission. Sixty-seven percent, 65%, and 75% of patients receiving 1-, 2-, and 4-g enemas were markedly improved according to the physician's global assessment compared with 27% of patients treated with placebo. The mean improvement in sigmoidoscopic index was 5.8, 5.9, and 6.4 points (on a 15-point scale) for the 1-, 2-, and 4-g enema groups compared with a decrease of 1.8 points for the placebo group. Improvement in biopsy scores was observed in 47, 55, and 59% of 1-, 2-, and 4-g groups contrasted with 27% of the placebo-treated patients. All three doses were significantly more effective than placebo in reducing symptoms and trips to the toilet compared with placebo. No dose-response relation was demonstrated. The safety profile was similar to that of placebo. In conclusion, mesalamine enemas are effective as a single agent in the short-term treatment of distal ulcerative colitis without an apparent dose response between 1 and 4 g nightly.

Acute Disease↗

PubMed1982

Gastrointestinal blood loss of oxaprozin and aspirin with placebo control.

The objective of this study was to compare the effects of oxaprozin (4,5-diphenyl-2-oxazolepropionic acid), a nonsteroidal, antiinflammatory compound, and aspirin in a double-blind, placebo-controlled study to estimate gastrointestinal bleeding. The determination of fecal blood loss was made quantitatively by the use of the radioactive (51Cr) technique. During the first week, subjects were controlled with and without placebo. At the end of the second week, the subjects were divided and randomly assigned to one of three groups; 10 received 1200 mg oxaprozin (600 mg twice daily), 11 received 3900 mg aspirin (975 mg four times a day), and the remaining 8 subjects received placebo for two weeks. During the last two weeks, all received placebo again. A statistical analysis of variance showed that there were no statistical differences between the groups during the first and last two weeks of placebo therapy. During the active treatment period, weeks 3 and 4, there were statistically significant differences among the three groups. The mean blood loss during week 3 was significantly greater for the aspirin group, 8.8 ml/day, than the oxaprozin group, 3.3 ml/day (P less than 0.05), and the placebo group, 1.4 ml/day (P less than 0.001). The smaller difference between oxaprozin and placebo was also significant (P less than 0.05). During the fourth week, the mean daily blood loss among oxaprozin patients had decreased to 2.3 ml/day, and no statistically significant difference from placebo (1.1 ml/day) was found.

Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal↗

PubMed1996

Comparison of nonrandomized trials with slow-release sodium fluoride with a randomized placebo-controlled trial in postmenopausal osteoporosis.

The results of slow-release sodium fluoride (SR-NaF) treatment in two nonrandomized trials involving 65 patients with postmenopausal osteoporosis from the primary site and 121 patients from collaborative sites were compared with those obtained from 54 treated patients and 56 patients taking placebo from a randomized controlled trial. Spinal fracture data were analyzed separately in mild to moderate bone loss of lumbar spine (baseline L2-L4 bone density [BD] > or = 65% young normal) and in severe bone loss (BD < 65%). Since demographic and fracture data were similar among fluoride-treated patients from the three trials at each stratum of bone loss, their data were combined. In mild to moderate bone loss, SR-NaF treatment in the combined group virtually eliminated new spinal fractures with 96.6% of patients remaining fracture-free. The Fluoride group had a markedly lower individual vertebral fracture rate (0.025 vs. 0.188/patient year, p = 0.0001) and group vertebral fracture rate (0.029 vs. 0.175/patient year, relative risk [RR] 0.12, p = 0.0001) than the Placebo group. In severe bone loss, the combined treated group had a significantly lower new spinal fracture rate than the Placebo group, although the differences were not as marked (group vertebral fracture rate of 0.150 vs. 0.276/patient year, RR 0.54, p = 0.03). In the combined fluoride-treated group, the L2-L4 bone mass rose by 4-6%/year for 4 years, and the femoral neck BD increased by 1-2%/year during first 2 years. The radial shaft BD did not change. The Placebo group did not show a change in bone mass at any site. The prevalence (percentage) of patients with related gastrointestinal side effects and nonvertebral fracture rates did not differ significantly between the combined SR-NaF group and the Placebo group (hip fracture rate of 0.0045/patient year in SR-NaF and 0.0053/patient year in Placebo; appendicular fracture other than hip (see text) rate of 0.0193/patient year in SR-NaF and 0.0159/patient year in Placebo). A subgroup analysis showed a low baseline L2-L4 BD, high prevalent spinal fractures, and reduced body weight to be important determinants of the development of spinal fracture during SR-NaF treatment. Concomitant medications (estrogen, vitamin D, thiazide and thyroid hormone) were not independent predictors of the spinal fracture risk. Only 17% of fluoride-treated patients were nonresponders (new spinal fractures or a fall/no change in L2-L4 bone mass). Thus, the effects of SR-NaF treatment on the spinal fracture rate from nonrandomized trials were similar to those of the treated group of the randomized trial but different from those of the Placebo group. The similarity of response of nonrandomized trials with that of the randomized controlled trial and the resultant combined analysis further validate the efficacy and safety of SR-NaF in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis.

Bone Density↗

PubMed1994

Oral sumatriptan compared with placebo in the acute treatment of migraine.

This multicentre, double-blind, parallel-group study compared the efficacy, safety and tolerability of oral sumatriptan, given as a new film-coated tablet, with placebo in the acute treatment of migraine. Patients were randomised unequally (1:2) to receive placebo or sumatriptan. Eighty-eight patients received placebo (plus an optional dose 2 h later if the headache persisted plus a further optional dose for recurrence within 24 h) and 162 patients received sumatriptan 100 mg (plus an optional 100 mg dose at 2 h and an optional 100 mg dose within 24 h). Sumatriptan was significantly more effective than placebo at relieving headache (defined as reduction in severity from severe or moderate pain to mild or no pain) at 2 h (51% versus 31%, P = 0.003) and 4 h (71% versus 35%, P < 0.001). Fewer sumatriptan-treated patients required a second dose compared with placebo-treated patients (49% versus 74%, P < 0.001). More sumatriptan-treated patients were completely pain free compared with placebo-treated patients at both 2 h (24% versus 12%) and 4 h (48% versus 18). Patients receiving sumatriptan reported earlier onset of headache relief than patients receiving placebo. Headache relief in sumatriptan-treated patients was similar, irrespective of the type of migraine (with or without aura) or the time of treatment < or = 4 h or > 4 h after onset of migraine). Sumatriptan was more effective than placebo at relieving nausea, vomiting and photophobia/phonophobia. Few patients were evaluable for treatment of headache recurrence, and statistical analysis was not possible.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Acute Disease↗

PubMed1996

Olanzapine versus placebo: results of a double-blind, fixed-dose olanzapine trial.

Olanzapine is a potential new "atypical" antipsychotic agent. This double-blind, acute phase study compared two doses of olanzapine [1 mg/day (Olz1.0); 10 mg/day (Olz10.0)] with placebo in the treatment of 152 patients who met the DSM-III-R criteria for schizophrenia and had a Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS)-total score (items scored 0-6) > or = 24. In overall symptomatology improvement [BPRS-total score and Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS)-total score], Olz10.0 was statistically significantly superior to placebo. In positive symptom improvement (PANSS-positive score, BPRS-positive score), Olz10.0 was statistically significantly superior to placebo. In negative symptom improvement (PANSS-negative score), Olz10.0 was statistically superior to placebo. Olz 1.0 was clinically comparable to placebo in all efficacy comparisons. The only adverse event to show an overall statistically significant incidence difference was anorexia (reported for 10% of placebo-treated and 0% of Olz10.0-treated patients). The Olz10.0-treated patients improved over baseline with respect to parkinsonian and akathisia symptoms, and these changes were comparable with those observed with placebo. There were no dystonias associated with Olz10.0 treatment. At endpoint, the incidence of patients with elevated prolactin values did not differ statistically significantly between placebo-treated and Olz10.0-treated patients. Olanzapine appears to be not only safe and effective, but a promising atypical antipsychotic candidate.

Adult↗

PubMed1992

A comparison of moclobemide, amitriptyline and placebo in depression: a Canadian multicentre study.

In a 7-week prospective multicentre study, the efficacy, tolerability and safety of moclobemide were compared to those of amitriptyline and placebo in parallel groups of out-patients (n = 173) fulfilling the DSM III-R criteria for a major depressive episode. Participants were required to have a minimum baseline total score of 18 on the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD). After a 1-week placebo washout, patients were randomly allocated to the three treatment groups. Assessment of efficacy, as judged by the number of responders achieving a 50% reduction in HAMD score by the end of treatment, showed that both moclobemide and amitriptyline were significantly superior to placebo, but that they were not significantly different from each other. Both treatments differed significantly from placebo with respect to the Physician's Global Assessment of Efficacy ('very good' or 'good' response: moclobemide 57%, amitriptyline 60% and placebo 35%). Assessment of tolerance as judged by the spontaneous reporting of adverse events showed a significant superiority of moclobemide over amitriptyline, but there was no significant difference between moclobemide and placebo. At termination of the study, amitriptyline patients showed a significant elevation of heart rate both supine (10.8 beats/min) and standing (15.5 beats/min), as well as significant weight gain (1.7 kg), but no changes were seen in the moclobemide or placebo groups. In conclusion, both moclobemide and amitriptyline were found to be more effective than placebo in the treatment of depression, while moclobemide had fewer side effects.

Adult↗

PubMed2000

[Effect of recombinant growth hormone on wound healing in severely burned adults. A placebo controlled, randomized double-blind phase II study].

INTRODUCTION: Recombinant growth hormone (rGH) has been used successfully in burned children with a shortened donor-site healing time and length of hospital stay as well as a protein-sparing effect. In adult burn patients, no comparable study exists to date. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study was performed on 49 adults, aged 18-60, with an Abbreviated Burn Severity Index (ABSI) score of 7-I1 as a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study. The treatment period was 28 days and follow-up period 1 year. rGH was administered subcutaneously at a dose of 0.5 lU/kg per day in 26 patients, 23 patients were in the placebo group. Wound-closure assessment was performed on the day of admission and on each day of dressing change. A wound-closure index (WCI) was calculated. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients, 19 in the rGH group and 18 in the placebo group, survived and were available for primary efficacy analysis. The mean total body surface area (TBSA) burned was 41.5% (rGH) versus 36.7% (placebo); the average ABSI score was 8.27 (rGH) versus 7.9 (placebo). The wound-closure index was not significantly different in patients treated with rGH (1.92) compared with patients treated with placebo (1.72). WCI for partial thickness-loss burn wounds did not significantly differ from rGH (0.9) to placebo (0.69). The donor site healing time in rGH-treated patients (12 days) was not significantly different compared to placebo patients (10.4 days). CONCLUSION: In severely burned adult patients rGH has no positive effect on burn wound or donor-site healing.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2006

Positive effect of alendronate on bone mineral density and markers of bone turnover in patients with rheumatoid arthritis on chronic treatment with low-dose prednisone: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Alendronate has been described to have a bone-sparing effect in patients treated with moderate and high dosages of prednisone for heterogeneous diseases, however no data are available on groups of patients with the same underlying diseases who receive chronic low-dose prednisone treatment. The objective of the investigation reported here was, therefore, to study the effect of alendronate on bone mineral density (BMD) of the lumbar spine and hips in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who are on chronic low-dose prednisone treatment. METHODS: A total of 163 patients with RA, according to the ACR-criteria, were enrolled in a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. The patients were treated with low-dose prednisone (<or=10 mg/day) for at least 3 months. The patients were randomized to receive daily doses of alendronate or placebo: men and premenopausal women received 5 mg alendronate (or placebo) daily; postmenopausal women received 10 mg alendronate (or placebo) daily. All patients received daily calcium (500 mg, or 1000 mg, depending on baseline dietary calcium intake) and vitamin D3 (400 IU) supplementation. BMD of the lumbar spine (L1-L4) and the (total) hip was measured at baseline and after 6 and 12 months. The primary endpoint was change in BMD of the lumbar spine after 12 months (ITT). At baseline and after 3 and 12 months, serum bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (BAP) and urinary excretion of N-telopeptide (NTX) were measured. Radiographs of the thoracic and lumbar spine were made at baseline and after 12 months and subsequently scored for vertebral deformities. RESULTS: The groups were comparable at baseline in age, gender, daily dosage of prednisone, BMD at the spine and the hip and markers of bone turnover, while the number of patients with prevalent vertebral deformities was slightly higher in the alendronate-treated patients (54% versus 39%, not significant). After 12 months, BMD at the lumbar spine had increased by 3.7% in the alendronate-treated patients and decreased by -1.0% in the placebo-treated patients (p<0.0001); at the hip, the changes were +1.0% and -0.1%, respectively (not significant). After 3 months, serum BAP had decreased by 16.9% in the alendronate group versus 3.3% in the placebo group (p=0.0005), while urinary NTX had decreased by 46.4% in the alendronate group versus 12.1% in the placebo group (p<0.0001). After 12 months, no statistically significant difference was found between the groups with respect to number of patients with incident vertebral or non-vertebral fractures. Adverse effects were relatively common in these patients with severe RA: adverse effects were observed in 68% of the alendronate-treated patients and in 73% of the placebo patients (not significant), while serious adverse events were observed in 13% and 17%, respectively (not significant). CONCLUSION: We observed a favourable effect of alendronate on the BMD of the lumbar spine and on the markers of bone turnover in patients with RA treated with low-dose prednisone. These data support the conclusion that the prescribing of alendronate is not only beneficial in patients treated with high-dose prednisone but also in RA patients chronically treated with low-dose prednisone.

Absorptiometry, Photon↗

PubMed1999

Recombinant human erythropoietin and hemoglobin concentration at operation and during the postoperative period: reduced need for blood transfusions in patients undergoing colorectal surgery--prospective double-blind placebo-controlled study.

In a double-blind placebo-controlled study we investigated the effect of recombinant human erythropoietin (r-HuEPO), on the perioperative hemoglobin concentration and the use of blood transfusions in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery with a preoperative hemoglobin level </=8.5 mmol/L. Altogether 100 were included, and 81 patients could be evaluated. A total of 38 patients received r-HuEPO in a dose of 300 IU/kg body weight on day 4 before surgery and 150 IU/kg daily for the following 7 days; 43 patients received placebo. In addition, all patients received daily doses of 200 mg iron orally for 4 days before surgery. There were no differences between the two groups with regard to sex, height, weight, serum electrolytes, and liver function tests at study entry. The preentry hemoglobin concentration was similar in the two groups, with a median value of 7.9 (range 5.3-8.5) mmol/L in the erythropoietin group and 7.6 (5.1-8.5) mmol/L in the placebo group. On the day of surgery the median hemoglobin concentration was 7.8 (5. 3-9.2) mmol/L in the erythropoietin group and 7.2 (4.6-8.5) mmol/L in the placebo group (p < 0.05). On postoperative days 3 and 7 the values were 7.2 (5.3-8.2) and 7.5 (5.4-9.4) mmol/L, respectively, in the erythropoietin group compared to 6.7 (5.2-7.8) and 6.9 (5.1-8.6) mmol/L in the placebo group (p < 0.01). At discharge the hemoglobin concentration was 7.8 (5.9-8.8) mmol/L in the erythropoietin group and 7.2 (5.4-8.6) mmol/L in the placebo group (p < 0.002). The blood loss during operation was similar in the two groups. In the erythropoietin group the median value was 280 ml (range 25-2000 ml), with the lower and upper quartiles 150 and 500 ml, respectively. In the placebo group the blood loss was median 300 ml (range 50-1800 ml), with the lower and upper quartiles 200 and 750 ml, respectively. The number of blood transfusions given was significantly lower in the erythropoietin group, with a mean of 0.3 (range 0-6) units compared to 1.6 (0-9) units in the control group (p < 0.05). In conclusion, the hemoglobin concentration at the time of surgery and during the week following surgery was significantly higher in the group of patients receiving r-HuEPO perioperatively compared to the placebo group together with a significant lower use of blood transfusions in the r-HuEPO group. However, the clinical implications of these findings has yet to be proven.

Adult↗

PubMed2000

[Placebo].

BACKGROUND: The placebo reaction is a widely known phenomenon but the way it develops is not fully understood. This fact has given rise to numerous misinformed opinions on this subject. PLACEBO ANALGESIA: More research has been done in the field of placebo analgesia, where the involvement of the endogenous opioid systems was discovered some twenty years ago. Recently there have been some new discoveries concerning the role of expectancy and drug conditioning in experimentally induced placebo analgesia. PLACEBO REACTION: The placebo reaction is very impressive not only following drug administration, but also after surgical operations. In many cases, it is extremely difficult to decide whether a therapeutic success is due to a given medical intervention or to a placebo response. The use of placebo controlled clinical studies remains an ethically charged issue.

English Abstract↗

PubMed2026

Improved quality of life and prolonged survival with add-on homeopathic treatment in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, three-arm, multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Alongside conventional anticancer treatment, add-on homeopathy might help to alleviate adverse effects of conventional therapy. AIM: The aim of this study was to replicate previous studies on the effect of adjunctive homeopathy on quality of life (QoL) and survival in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. METHOD: In this prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, three-arm multicenter phase III study with quadruple-checked data analysis, we investigated the potential effects of an add-on homeopathic treatment compared to placebo in patients with stage IV NSCLC in terms of QoL. Ninety-eight received either individualized homeopathic medicinal products (HMPs; n = 51) or placebo (n = 47) in a double-blinded fashion. Fifty-two control patients without homeopathic treatment were only observed in terms of their survival rate. The ingredients of the various HMPs were mainly prepared of plant, mineral, or animal origin. The data entry and statistical analysis were subject to an exceptional quadruple-checked data analysis process. The analysis presented in this article was inspired by our earlier report of this trial published in The Oncologist in 2020, which was retracted by that journal in November 2025 after two corrections; a majority of the co-authors disagreed with this decision. The present article is based on the same trial dataset but was deliberately designed to highlight the unique research methodology: design and preparation by a lead statistician, data entry, data clearing and independent statistical evaluation were performed in four mutually independent steps, reporting follows the CONSORT statement, and the interpretation of the findings has been reframed conservatively. RESULTS: Global health status (QoL) was higher in the homeopathy group than in the placebo group after 9 weeks and after 18 weeks (p < 0.001). With the exception of cognitive functioning at 9 weeks and of pain, diarrhea and financial difficulties at 9 weeks, all functional and symptom scales of the EORTC QLQ-C30 favored the homeopathy group (p < 0.001 for the multivariate comparisons), with between-group differences exceeding the threshold of 10 points that is generally regarded as clinically meaningful. Median survival time over the 730-day observation period was 435 days in the homeopathy group, 257 days in the placebo group (p = 0.010), and 228 days in the non-randomized control group (p < 0.001); the corresponding 2-year survival rates were 45.1%, 23.4%, and 13.5% (homeopathy vs. placebo p = 0.020; homeopathy vs. control p < 0.001). The difference between the placebo group and the non-randomized control group was not statistically significant (p = 0.154). CONCLUSION: In this trial, add-on homeopathy was associated with better quality of life across most functional and symptom domains, with clinically meaningful effect sizes congruently to a previous open study. Survival time was significantly longer in the homeopathy group compared to both the placebo and control groups. Independent replication, ideally within contemporary immuno-oncological treatment regimens is required. TRIALS REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01509612; January 7, 2012.

Humans↗

PubMed2006

Randomised placebo-controlled trial on the effectiveness of nasal salmon calcitonin in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis.

This is a double blind randomised controlled trial to assess the effectiveness of nasal salmon calcitonin in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. The trial compared the outcome of salmon calcitonin nasal spray to placebo nasal spray in patients with MRI confirmed lumbar spinal stenosis. Lumbar spinal stenosis is one of the commonest conditions encountered by spine surgeons. It more frequently affects elderly patients and lumbar decompression has been used to treat the condition with variable success. Non operative measures have been investigated, but their success ranges from 15% to 43% in patients followed up for 1-5 years (Simotas in Clin Orthop 1(384):153-161, 2001). Salmon calcitonin injections have been investigated in previous trials and may have a treatment effect. Nasal salmon calcitonin has become available and if effective would have advantages over injections. Forty patients with symptoms of neurogenic claudication and MRI proven lumbar spinal stenosis were randomly assigned either nasal salmon calcitonin or placebo nasal spray to use for 4 weeks. This was followed by a 'washout' period of 6 weeks, and subsequent treatment with 6 weeks of nasal salmon calcitonin. Standard spine outcome measures including Oswestry disability index (ODI), low back outcome score, visual analogue score and shuttle walking test were administered at baseline, 4, 10 and 16 weeks. Twenty patients received nasal salmon calcitonin and twenty patients received placebo nasal spray. At 4 weeks post treatment there was no statistically significant difference in the outcome measures between the two groups. The change in ODI was a mean 1.3 points for the calcitonin group and 0.6 points for the placebo group (P = 0.51), the mean change in visual analogue score for leg pain was 10 mm in the calcitonin group and 0 mm in the placebo group (P = 0.51). There was no significant difference in walking distance between the two groups, with a mean improvement in walking distance of 21 m in the calcitonin group and 8 m in the placebo group (P = 0.78). At the end of the trial the ODI had improved by a mean of 3.7 points in the calcitonin group and 3.8 points in the placebo group (P = 0.44). This randomised placebo controlled trial has not shown any treatment effect in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis treated with nasal salmon calcitonin.

Administration, Intranasal↗

PubMed1995

Premature rupture of membranes in nulliparas at term with unfavorable cervices: a double-blind randomized trial of prostaglandin and placebo.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the use of a prostaglandin (PG) E2 3-mg pessary followed by a delay of 12 hours before stimulation of labor with oxytocin improves obstetric outcome compared with the use of a placebo pessary. METHODS: One hundred fifty-five nulliparas at term with poor cervical scores (modified Bishop score below 6 of 10) and premature rupture of membranes (PROM) were recruited for this double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial. On admission to the study, either a PGE2 pessary or an identical-appearing placebo pessary was inserted into the posterior fornix. If labor did not start in the next 12 hours or if symptoms and signs of infection were evident, labor was induced with oxytocin infusion. Assignment was unblinded at the end of the study, and details of the labor and maternal and neonatal outcome in women who received a PG pessary were compared with those who received a placebo pessary. RESULTS: Women receiving a PG pessary were significantly less likely to require stimulation of labor at the end of 12 hours than were those given a placebo pessary (37 versus 58%, P = .002). The mean time between admission to study and delivery was significantly shorter in the PG group compared with the placebo group (15 versus 19 hours, P = .01). The rate of cesarean delivery was not statistically different in the two groups (13.9% with PG versus 15.8% with placebo). CONCLUSION: In nulliparas with poor cervical scores who present with PROM at term and no evidence of infection or obstetric complications, use of a PGE2 pessary resulted in more women establishing labor earlier, with a resultant reduction in the admission-to-delivery interval, compared with the use of a placebo pessary. The cesarean delivery rates in the two groups were similar, and there were no significant differences in neonatal outcome.

Cervix Uteri↗