Search PubMed⌕ Search

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.

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

At least 793 records · Page 44Linked to original sources
PubMed2003

Donepezil in vascular dementia: a randomized, placebo-controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of donepezil in patients with vascular dementia (VaD). METHODS: Patients (n = 616; mean age, 75.0 years) with probable or possible VaD, according to National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke-Association Internationale pour la Recherche en l'Enseignement en Neurosciences criteria, were randomized to receive donepezil 5 mg/day (n = 208), donepezil 10 mg/day (after 5 mg/day for the first 28 days) (n = 215), or placebo (n = 193) for 24 weeks. RESULTS: Seventy-six percent of the patients enrolled had probable VaD. A total of 75.3% of the 10 mg donepezil group and 80.8% of the 5 mg group completed the study compared with 83.4% of the placebo group. Both donepezil-treated groups showed improvements in cognitive function on the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale compared with placebo, with a mean endpoint treatment difference, as measured by the change from baseline score, of approximately 2 points (donepezil 5 mg, -1.65 [p = 0.003]; 10 mg, -2.09 [p = 0.0002]). Greater improvements on the Clinician's Interview-Based Impression of Change-plus version were observed with both donepezil groups than with the placebo group (overall donepezil treatment vs placebo p = 0.008); 25% of the placebo group showed improvement compared with 39% (p = 0.004) of the 5 mg group and 32% (p = 0.047) of the 10 mg group. Withdrawal rates due to adverse events were low (placebo, 8.8%; donepezil 5 mg, 10.1%; 10 mg, 16.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Donepezil-treated patients demonstrated significant improvements in cognition and global function compared with placebo-treated patients, and donepezil was well tolerated.

Adult↗
PubMed1993

Interferon beta-1b is effective in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. I. Clinical results of a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. The IFNB Multiple Sclerosis Study Group.

We report a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of interferon beta-1b (IFNB) in 372 ambulatory patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (MS). Entry criteria included an Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score of 0 to 5.5 and at least two exacerbations in the previous 2 years. One-third of the patients received placebo, one-third 1.6 million international units (MIU) of IFNB, and one-third 8 MIU of IFNB, self-administered by subcutaneous injections every other day. The primary end points were differences in exacerbation rates and proportion of patients remaining exacerbation-free. The annual exacerbation rate for patients receiving placebo was 1.27; for 1.6 MIU IFNB, 1.17; and for 8 MIU IFNB, 0.84 after 2 years. Exacerbation rates were significantly lower in both treatment groups compared with the placebo group (8 MIU versus placebo, p = 0.0001; 1.6 MIU versus placebo, p = 0.0101; and 8 MIU versus 1.6 MIU, p = 0.0086), suggesting a dosage effect. The reduction in exacerbation severity in the 8 MIU group was attributable to a twofold reduction in the frequency of moderate and severe attacks. More patients in the 8 MIU group (n = 36) were exacerbation-free at 2 years compared with the placebo group (n = 18; p = 0.007). EDSS scores changed little from baseline in both the placebo and treatment arms. Accordingly, a significant change in disability could not be discerned in this trial. Finally, in serial MRIs, MS activity was significantly less in the high-dose IFNB group.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Adult↗
PubMed1995

Fatigue therapy in multiple sclerosis: results of a double-blind, randomized, parallel trial of amantadine, pemoline, and placebo.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the relative efficacy of amantadine, pemoline, and placebo in treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS)-related fatigue. BACKGROUND: Fatigue is a complication of MS. Both pemoline and amantadine have been used to treat MS fatigue, but their relative efficacy is not known. METHODS: Amantadine, pemoline, and placebo were compared in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study using a parallel-group design. Ninety-three ambulatory MS patients completed the study. Primary outcome measures were the fatigue severity scale (FSS); the MS-specific fatigue scale (MS-FS); and subjective response determined by verbal self-report. Secondary outcome measures consisted of assessments of sleep, depression, and vitality. Repeated-measures analysis of variance with planned post-hoc contrasts and Fisher's exact test were used to compare treatment response. RESULTS: Amantadine-treated patients showed a significantly greater reduction in fatigue, as measured by the MS-FS, than did patients treated with placebo (p = 0.04). By verbal report at the end of the study, 79% of patients treated with amantadine versus 52% treated with placebo and 32% treated with pemoline preferred drug therapy compared with no treatment (p = 0.03). No significant differences in any primary outcome measures were noted between pemoline and placebo. Neither amantadine nor pemoline affected sleep or depression relative to placebo. CONCLUSION: Amantadine was significantly better than placebo in treating fatigue in MS patients, whereas pemoline was not. The benefit of amantadine was not due to changes in sleep, depression, or neurologic disability.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1997

Treatment of inclusion-body myositis with IVIg: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

We randomized 19 patients with inclusion-body myositis (IBM) to a double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study using monthly infusions of 2 g/kg intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) or placebo for 3 months. Patients crossed over to the alternate treatment after a washout period. We evaluated responses at baseline and at the end of each treatment period using expanded (0-10) MRC scales, the Maximum Voluntary Isometric Contraction (MVIC) method, symptom and disability scores, and quantitative swallowing studies. We calculated the differences in scores between IVIg and placebo from baseline to end of treatment. Of the 19 patients, 9 (mean age, 61.2 years; mean disease duration, 5.6 years) were randomized to IVIg and 10 (mean age, 66.1 years; mean disease duration, 7.4 years) to placebo. During IVIg the patients gained a mean of 4.2 (-16 to +39.8) MRC points, and during placebo lost 2.7 (-10 to +8) points (p < 0.1). These gains were not significant. Similar results were obtained with the MRC and MVIC scores when the patients crossed to the alternate treatment. Six patients had a functionally important improvement by more than 10 MRC points that declined when crossed over to placebo. Limb-by-limb analysis demonstrated that during IVIg the muscle strength in 39% of the lower extremity limbs significantly increased compared with placebo (p < 0.05), while a simultaneous decrease in 28% of other limbs was detected. The clinical importance of these minor gains is unclear. The duration of swallowing functions measured in seconds with ultrasound improved statistically in the IVIg-randomized patients (p < 0.05) compared with placebo. Although the study did not establish efficacy of IVIg, possibly because of the small sample size, the drug induced functionally important improvement in 6 (28%) of the 19 patients. Whether the modest gains noted in certain muscle groups justify the high cost of trying IVIg in IBM patients at a given stage of the disease remains unclear.

Activities of Daily Living↗
PubMed1997

Naratriptan is effective and well tolerated in the acute treatment of migraine. Results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study. The Naratriptan S2WA3003 Study Group.

The efficacy and tolerability of naratriptan tablets (2.5 mg, 1 mg, and 0.25 mg) compared with placebo in the acute treatment of migraine were evaluated in a randomized, double-blind, four-period crossover study. Five hundred eighty-six assessable patients received naratriptan 2.5 mg, 595 received 1 mg, 591 received 0.25 mg, 602 received placebo. Headache relief (moderate or severe pain reduced to mild or none) 4 hours postdose was reported in 68% of patients after treatment with naratriptan 2.5 mg compared with 57% after 1 mg, 39% after 0.25 mg, and 33% after placebo (p < 0.001 naratriptan 2.5 mg and 1 mg versus placebo and 1 mg and 2.5 mg versus 0.25 mg). Headache relief was maintained 8, 12, and 24 hours postdose with no use of rescue medication or a second dose of study medication by significantly (p < 0.001) greater percentages of patients after treatment with naratriptan 2.5 mg or 1 mg compared with naratriptan 0.25 mg or placebo. Naratriptan was also more effective than placebo in reducing clinical disability and the incidences of nausea, photophobia, and phonophobia. The overall incidence of adverse events and the incidences of specific adverse events did not differ in the naratriptan groups compared with placebo. No clinically relevant changes in ECG, blood pressure, or laboratory findings were reported. These data demonstrate that naratriptan is effective and well tolerated for the acute treatment of migraine. The 2.5-mg dose was associated with superior efficacy, whereas its adverse event profile was similar to that of placebo.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2000

A 5-month, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of galantamine in AD. The Galantamine USA-10 Study Group.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy and tolerability of galantamine, using a slow dose escalation schedule of up to 8 weeks, in 978 patients with mild to moderate AD. METHODS: A 5-month multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial. Following a 4-week placebo run-in, patients were randomized to one of four treatment arms: placebo or galantamine escalated to final maintenance doses of 8, 16, or 24 mg/day. Outcome measures included the cognitive subscale of the AD Assessment Scale (ADAS-cog), the Clinician's Interview-Based Impression of Change plus Caregiver Input (CIBIC-plus), the AD Cooperative Study Activities of Daily Living inventory, and the Neuropsychiatric Inventory. Standard safety evaluations and adverse event monitoring were carried out. RESULTS: After 5 months, the galantamine-placebo differences on ADAS-cog were 3.3 points for the 16 mg/day group and 3.6 points for the 24 mg/day group (p < 0.001 versus placebo, both doses). Compared with placebo, the galantamine 16- and 24-mg/day groups also had a significantly better outcome on CIBIC-plus, activities of daily living, and behavioral symptoms. Treatment discontinuations due to adverse events were low in all galantamine groups (6 to 10%) and comparable with the discontinuation rate in the placebo group (7%). The incidence of adverse events in the galantamine groups, notably gastrointestinal symptoms, was low and most adverse events were mild. CONCLUSIONS: Galantamine 16 and 24 mg/day significantly benefits the cognitive, functional, and behavioral symptoms of AD as compared with placebo. Slow dose escalation appears to enhance the tolerability of galantamine, minimizing the incidence and severity of adverse events.

Activities of Daily Living↗
PubMed1993

Idiopathic facial nerve paralysis: a randomized double blind controlled study of placebo versus prednisone.

Idiopathic facial nerve paralysis (IFNP) is a common malady. Because its etiology is unclear, there are a variety of treatment options. Studies to date have not clearly established the benefits of treatment with oral steroids (prednisone). The authors performed a randomized double-blind controlled study comparing the use of placebo versus prednisone which shows that prednisone-treated patients benefit from early treatment. Seventy-six patients met inclusion criteria and completed follow-up until recovery; 35 patients received prednisone and 41 received placebo. Their mean age was 36.8 years. Facial nerve function was assessed using the House-Brackmann facial nerve grading scale, as well as a variety of other measures. Patients were evaluated pretreatment, regularly post-treatment until judged recovered (return of facial function to a grade III or better), and at 6 months after recovery. Difference in mean time to resolution for the prednisone (51.4 days) and placebo (69.3 days) groups was not statistically significant. There was a significant difference in grade at recovery, with the placebo group having a higher proportion of grade III results (P < .03). Eight of 10 patients with electroneurography (ENOG) evidence of denervation were in the placebo group and accounted for 6 of the 7 grade III results. However, the difference in proportion of patients with evidence of denervation for the prednisone (5.7%) and placebo (19.5%) groups did not achieve statistical significance. This study shows that patients treated with prednisone have less denervation than placebo-treated patients. They also have a significant improvement in facial grade at recovery compared to placebo-treated patients. Therefore, the authors recommend that all patients at risk for developing denervation receive prednisone treatment.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2002

A 6-month, placebo-controlled study comparing lung function and health status changes in COPD patients treated with tiotropium or salmeterol.

BACKGROUND: Tiotropium, a once-daily anticholinergic, and salmeterol represent two inhaled, long-acting bronchodilators from different pharmacologic classes. A trial was designed to examine the efficacy and safety of both compounds with multiple outcome measures, including lung function, dyspnea, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with COPD. METHODS: A 6-month, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group study of tiotropium, 18 microg once daily via dry-powder inhaler, compared with salmeterol, 50 microg bid via metered-dose inhaler, was conducted in patients with COPD. Efficacy was assessed by 12-h monitoring of spirometry, transition dyspnea index (TDI), and the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ). RESULTS: A total of 623 patients participated (tiotropium, n= 209; salmeterol, n = 213; and placebo, n = 201). The groups were similar in age (mean, 65 years), gender (75% men), and baseline FEV(1) (mean, 1.08 +/- 0.37 L; percent predicted, 40 +/- 12% [+/- SD]). Compared with placebo treatment, the mean predose morning FEV(1) following 6 months of therapy increased significantly more for the tiotropium group (0.14 L) than the salmeterol group (0.09 L; p < 0.01). The average FEV(1) (0 to 12 h) for tiotropium was statistically superior to salmeterol (difference, 0.08 L; p < 0.001). Tiotropium improved TDI focal score by 1.02 U compared with placebo (p = 0.01), whereas there was no significant change in TDI focal score with salmeterol (0.24 U). Tiotropium was superior to salmeterol in improving TDI focal score (p < 0.05). At 6 months, the mean improvement in SGRQ total score vs baseline was tiotropium, - 5.14 U (p < 0.05 vs placebo); salmeterol, - 3.54 U (p = 0.4 vs placebo); and placebo, - 2.43 U. A statistically higher proportion of patients receiving tiotropium achieved at least a 4-U change in SGRQ score compared to patients receiving placebo. Both active drugs reduced the need for rescue albuterol (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Tiotropium once daily produces superior bronchodilation, improvements in dyspnea, and proportion of patients achieving meaningful changes in HRQoL compared to twice-daily salmeterol in patients with COPD.

Aged↗
PubMed2002

Efficacy and safety of beclomethasone dipropionate extrafine aerosol in childhood asthma: a 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) has been formulated as an extrafine aerosol (hydrofluoroalkane-134a [HFA]-BDP) [QVAR; 3M Pharmaceuticals; St Paul, MN], which gives improved lung deposition compared with chlorofluorocarbon (CFC)-BDP. The clinical efficacy of HFA-BDP has been established in adult asthma at a required dose below that of CFC-BDP, but has not been evaluated in children. OBJECTIVE: To examine the efficacy and safety of HFA-BDP in childhood asthma. DESIGN: A 12-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study involving 353 children aged 5 to 12 years with moderate, symptomatic asthma. After a 2-week run-in period, patients were randomized to HFA-BDP, 80 micro g/d (n = 120); HFA-BDP, 160 micro g/d (n = 117); or HFA-placebo (n = 116) administered twice daily. SETTING: Hospital outpatient. RESULTS: HFA-BDP, 80 micro g/d and 160 micro g/d, produced a significant, dose-related increase from baseline in FEV(1) percent predicted compared with placebo. At week 12, mean changes from baseline in FEV(1) percent predicted were 9.2% (p < or = 0.01 vs placebo), 10% (p < or = 0.01 vs placebo), and 3.9% for the HFA-BDP 80 micro g/d, HFA-BDP 160 micro g/d, and placebo groups, respectively. There was also a significant decrease in daily beta-agonist use, improvement in peak expiratory flow, and increase [correction] in the percentage of days free from asthma symptoms (p < or = 0.05 for HFA-BDP, 160 micro g/d, vs placebo at weeks 11 to 12). HFA-BDP was well tolerated, with no significant differences in the incidence or nature of adverse events between HFA-BDP and placebo groups. Neither were there significant differences between groups in mean percentage change from baseline in the morning plasma cortisol level at week 12 or in the percentage of patients with morning plasma cortisol levels below the reference range at baseline and week 12. In a subgroup tested, the percentage of patients with an abnormal response to low-dose adrenocorticotropic hormone stimulation at week 12 was low and similar among all groups. CONCLUSIONS: HFA-BDP, 80 to 160 micro g/d, is effective and safe in childhood asthma.

Aerosol Propellants↗
PubMed2006

Formoterol, 24 microg bid, and serious asthma exacerbations: similar rates compared with formoterol, 12 microg bid, with and without extra doses taken on demand, and placebo.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to determine whether high-dose formoterol, 24 mug bid, was associated with more asthma exacerbations compared with lower formoterol doses in patients with stable persistent asthma. Serious asthma exacerbations (life threatening or requiring hospitalization) were the primary end point. Secondary end points included significant exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids, all exacerbations, and changes in FEV1. DESIGN: In a multicenter, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study, patients were randomized to 16 weeks of treatment with formoterol, 24 microg bid; formoterol, 12 microg bid, with up to two additional 12-microg doses daily on demand for worsening symptoms (12 microg bid plus on demand); formoterol, 12 microg bid; or placebo. The formoterol 12-microg-bid plus on-demand regimen was administered open label, while the other three regimens were double blind. SETTING: Outpatient clinics. PATIENTS: A total of 2,085 patients aged > or = 12 years with stable, persistent asthma were enrolled and treated; 65% (n = 1,347) received regular concomitant antiinflammatory therapy during the study. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Nine patients had respiratory-related serious adverse events (SAEs) requiring hospitalization: two patients (0.4%) in the 24-microg-bid group; one patient (0.2%) in the 12-microg-bid plus on-demand group; five patients (0.9%) in the 12-microg-bid group; and one patient (0.2%) in the placebo group. All of these events were asthma related, except for two SAEs in the 12-microg-bid group that were later considered not to be asthma related by independent reviewers who were not associated with the conduct of the study. The proportions of patients with significant asthma exacerbations (requiring systemic corticosteroids) were similar in the 24-microg-bid group (6.3%, 33 of 527 patients), 12-microg-bid group (5.9%, 31 of 527 patients) and placebo group (8.8%, 45 of 514 patients) and lower in the 12-microg-bid plus on-demand group (4.4%, 23 of 517 patients; p = 0.0057 vs placebo). All treatments were well tolerated. All formoterol treatment regimens had a significant effect on FEV1 measured 2 h after dose during the study (p < 0.0001 vs placebo); and on predose trough FEV1 measured at all visits after baseline (p < 0.002 vs placebo). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with formoterol, 24 microg bid, was not associated with an increase in serious asthma exacerbations compared with the lower formoterol doses or placebo.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2003

Estradiol in premenstrual asthma: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover study.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To characterize asthma symptoms and pulmonary function throughout two menstrual cycles, with and without exogenous estradiol administration, in women with premenstrual asthma, and to determine the effect of estradiol administration on asthma symptoms, pulmonary function, quality of life, and biomarkers of airway inflammation. DESIGN: Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover study. SETTING: Respiratory clinic and clinical research center. SUBJECTS: Twelve women with documented premenstrual asthma (> or = 20% premenstrual worsening of asthma symptoms and/or of peak expiratory flow [PEF] during a 1-month screening phase). INTERVENTION: Each woman received either estradiol 2 mg or placebo orally between cycle days 23 and 28 (i.e., premenstrually, or before the onset of menses) in the first cycle and then crossed over to the other arm in the second cycle. Throughout both cycles, the women recorded daily morning and evening PEF readings and asthma symptoms. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Spirometry testing and measurement of serum estradiol and biomarkers of airway inflammation were performed on days 8 (follicular phase), 22 (luteal phase), and 28 (premenstrually) of both the estradiol and placebo cycles. During the two premenstrual visits, the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire was administered. No notable differences were observed between the estradiol and placebo cycles in daily PEF recordings or composite asthma symptoms scores. The area under the curve (AUC) for the composite asthma symptoms versus time profile was numerically, but not statistically, lower (denoting less severe symptoms) during the estradiol cycle than during the placebo cycle. Likewise, no significant difference in AUC values for morning PEF or evening PEF was found between the estradiol cycle and the placebo cycle. Despite differences (p<0.05) in day-28 estradiol concentrations for estradiol and placebo cycles, no significant differences were found in forced expiratory volume in 1 second, serum endothelin-1, serum and urine eosinophil protein X, urine leukotriene E4, or quality-of-life scores. CONCLUSION: Exogenously administered estradiol did not have a significant effect in women with premenstrual asthma whose asthma was classified predominantly as mild and under excellent control. As in the case of premenstrual syndrome, the placebo effect may be prominent in premenstrual asthma. Further trials, involving women with more severe asthma under poorer control, are warranted to discern underlying mechanisms for the worsening of asthma in relation to menstruation.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Effectiveness of sumatriptan in reducing productivity loss due to migraine: results of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of sumatriptan on migraine-related workplace productivity loss. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial, adult migraineurs self-injected 6 mg of sumatriptan or matching placebo to treat a moderate or severe migraine within the first 4 hours of a minimum of an 8-hour work shift. Outcome measures included productivity loss and number of patients returning to normal work performance 2 hours after injection and across the work shift, time to return to normal work performance, and time to headache relief. RESULTS: A total of 206 patients underwent screening, 140 (safety population) of whom returned for clinic treatment. Of these 140 patients, 119 received migraine treatment in the workplace (intent-to-treat population), 116 of whom comprised the study population. Of these 116 patients, 76 self-administered sumatriptan, and 40 self-administered placebo. Sumatriptan treatment tended to reduce median productivity loss 2 hours after injection compared with placebo (25.2 vs 29.9 minutes, respectively; P = .14). Significant reductions in productivity loss were obtained across the work shift after sumatriptan treatment compared with placebo (36.8 vs 72.6 minutes, respectively; P = .001). Significantly more sumatriptan-treated patients vs placebo-treated patients experienced shorter return to normal work performance at 2 hours (53/76 [70%] vs 12/40 [30%], respectively) and across the work shift (64/76 [84%] vs 23/40 [58%], respectively; P < .001). Significantly more sumatriptan-treated patients experienced headache relief 1 hour after injection compared with placebo-treated patients (48/76 [63%] vs 13/40 [33%], respectively; P = .004). CONCLUSION: Across an 8-hour work shift, sumatriptan was superior to placebo in reducing productivity loss due to migraine.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

Pain-free results with sumatriptan taken at the first sign of migraine pain: 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of sumatriptan, 50-mg and 100-mg tablets, compared with placebo for treatment of migraine at the first sign of pain. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two identical multicenter randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-attack studies were conducted from May through November 2000 in adults (aged 18-65 years). Patients treated migraine at the first sign of pain, while pain was mild, but not more than 2 hours after onset with oral sumatriptan, 50 mg or 100 mg, or matching placebo. The primary end point was pain-free relief at 2 hours after treatment with 50 mg of sumatriptan compared with placebo. RESULTS: There were 354 patients in study 1 and 337 patients in study 2. Significantly more patients treated with sumatriptan, 50 mg and 100 mg, were completely free from pain 2 and 4 hours after treatment vs patients treated with placebo (at 2 hours, 50% and 57% vs 29%; at 4 hours, 61% and 68% vs 30%; for both, P < .001). Also, significantly more patients treated with sumatriptan, 50 mg and 100 mg, were migraine-free (no pain or associated symptoms) vs those treated with placebo at 2 and 4 hours after treatment (at 2 hours, 43% and 49% vs 24%; at 4 hours, 54% and 63% vs 28%; for both, P < .001). The incidence of overall adverse events was low with the 50- and 100-mg dose of sumatriptan (placebo, 7%; sumatriptan at 50 mg, 14%; sumatriptan at 100 mg, 16%). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of migraine at the first sign of pain with sumatriptan, 50-mg and 100-mg tablets, provides superior pain-free relief at 2 and 4 hours after treatment compared with placebo. Results of these studies suggest that sumatriptan at 100 mg may be more efficacious than at 50 mg when used in the early treatment paradigm. Because these studies were not powered to detect statistical differences between active doses, studies to investigate this finding are warranted.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

Botulinum toxin type A for the prophylactic treatment of chronic daily headache: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To identify a treatment-responsive population for botulinum toxin type A (BoNTA) and to evaluate the safety and efficacy of 3 different doses of BoNTA as prophylactic treatment of chronic daily headache (CDH). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of BoNTA in patients with CDH was conducted from July 6, 2001, through November 7, 2003, at 28 North American study centers. Eligible patients were injected with BoNTA at 225 U, 150 U, 75 U, or placebo and returned for additional masked treatments at day 90 and day 180. Patients were assessed every 30 days for 9 months. The primary efficacy end point was the mean change from baseline in the frequency of headache-free days at day 180 for the placebo nonresponder group. RESULTS: For this study, 702 patients were enrolled and randomized. The primary efficacy end point was not met. Mean improvements from baseline at day 180 of 6.0, 7.9, 7.9, and 8.0 headache-free days per month were observed in the placebo nonresponder group treated with BoNTA at 225 U, 150 U, 75 U, or placebo, respectively (P=.44). An a priori-defined analysis of headache frequency revealed that BoNTA at 225 U or 150 U had significantly greater least squares mean changes from baseline than placebo at day 240 (-8.4, -8.6, and -6.4, respectively; P=.03 analysis of covariance). Only 27 of 702 patients (3.8%) withdrew from the study because of adverse events, which generally were transient and mild to moderate. CONCLUSIONS: Although the primary efficacy end point was not met, all groups responded to treatment. The 225 U and 150 U groups experienced a greater decrease in headache frequency than the placebo group at day 240. The placebo response was higher than expected. BoNTA was safe and well tolerated. Further study of BoNTA prophylactic treatment of CDH appears warranted.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2003

A placebo-controlled 18-month trial of lamotrigine and lithium maintenance treatment in recently depressed patients with bipolar I disorder.

BACKGROUND: The anticonvulsant lamotrigine was previously shown to be effective for bipolar depression. This study assessed the efficacy and tolerability of lamotrigine and lithium compared with placebo for the prevention of mood episodes in bipolar disorder. METHOD: During an 8- to 16-week open-label phase, lamotrigine (titrated to 200 mg/day) was added to current therapy for currently or recently depressed DSM-IV-defined bipolar I outpatients (N = 966) and concomitant drugs were gradually withdrawn. Patients stabilized on open-label treatment (N = 463) were then randomly assigned to lamotrigine (50, 200, or 400 mg/day; N = 221), lithium (0.8-1.1 mEq/L; N = 121), or placebo (N = 121) monotherapy for up to 18 months. The primary outcome measure was time from randomization to intervention (addition of pharmacotherapy) for any mood episode (depressive, manic, hypomanic, or mixed). Data were gathered from September 1997 to August 2001. RESULTS: Time to intervention for any mood episode was statistically superior (p = .029) for both lamotrigine and lithium compared with placebo-median survival times were 200, 170, and 93 days, respectively. Intervention for depression was more frequent than for mania by a factor of nearly 3:1. Lamotrigine was statistically superior to placebo at prolonging the time to intervention for a depressive episode (p = .047). The proportions of patients who were intervention-free for depression at 1 year were lamotrigine 57%, lithium 46%, and placebo 45%. Lithium was statistically superior to placebo at prolonging the time to intervention for a manic or hypomanic episode (p = .026). The proportions of patients who were intervention-free for mania at 1 year were lamotrigine 77%, lithium 86%, and placebo 72%. Headache was the most frequent adverse event for all 3 treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Lamotrigine and lithium were superior to placebo for the prevention of mood episodes in bipolar I patients, with lamotrigine predominantly effective against depression and lithium predominantly effective against mania.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

A pooled analysis of 2 placebo-controlled 18-month trials of lamotrigine and lithium maintenance in bipolar I disorder.

BACKGROUND: Two clinical trials, prospectively designed for combined analysis, compared placebo, lithium, and lamotrigine for treatment of bipolar I disorder in recently depressed or manic patients. METHOD: 1315 bipolar I patients (DSM-IV) enrolled in the initial open-label phase, and 638 were stabilized and randomly assigned to 18 months of double-blind monotherapy with lamotrigine (N = 280; 50-400 mg/day fixed dose or 100-400 mg/day flexible dose), lithium (N = 167; serum level of 0.8-1.1 mEq/L), or placebo (N = 191). The primary endpoint was time from randomization to intervention for a mood episode. Data were gathered from August 1997 to August 2001. RESULTS: Lamotrigine and lithium were superior to placebo for time to intervention for any mood episode (median survival: placebo, 86 days [95% CI = 58 to 121]; lithium, 184 days [95% CI = 119 to not calculable]; lamotrigine, 197 days [95% CI = 144 to 388]). Lamotrigine was superior to placebo for time to intervention for depression (median survival: placebo, 270 days [95% CI = 138 to not calculable]; lithium, median not calculable; lamotrigine, median not calculable). Lithium and lamotrigine were superior to placebo for time to intervention for mania (median survival not calculable for any group). Results of additional analyses adjusted for index mood were similar; however, only lithium was superior to placebo for intervention for mania. There was no evidence that either active treatment caused affective switch. Adverse event analysis indicated more diarrhea (19% vs. 7%, p <.05) and tremor (15% vs. 4%, p <.05) in lithium-treated patients compared with lamotrigine-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: Lamotrigine and lithium stabilized mood by delaying the time to treatment for a mood episode. Lamotrigine was effective against depression and mania, with more robust activity against depression. Lithium was effective against mania.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Incidence and time course of subsyndromal symptoms in patients with bipolar I disorder: an evaluation of 2 placebo-controlled maintenance trials.

BACKGROUND: Subsyndromal symptoms in bipolar disorder can cause significant functional impairment and are associated with relapse. METHOD: In this post hoc analysis from 2 randomized, double-blind, 18-month, placebo-controlled maintenance trials for bipolar I disorder (both trials were conducted between August 1997 and August 2001 and used DSM-IV criteria), the incidence, time course, and impact of pharmacotherapy on subsyndromal symptoms were examined. RESULTS: Subsyndromal symptoms occurred in approximately 25% of all visits. Compared with placebo (54.8%), a significantly higher mean percentage of visits in remission were observed with lamotrigine treatment (63.0%, p = .020) but not with lithium treatment (60.0%, p = .165). The median time to onset of subsyndromal symptoms for lamotrigine (N = 223), lithium (N = 164), and placebo (N = 188) was 15, 15, and 9 days, respectively. Compared with placebo, both lamotrigine and lithium significantly delayed the time from randomization to onset of subsyndromal symptoms (p = .046, lamotrigine vs. placebo; p = .033, lithium vs. placebo; p = .763, lamotrigine vs. lithium) and the time from onset of subsyndromal symptoms to subsequent mood episode (p = .037, lamotrigine vs. placebo; p = .023, lithium vs. placebo; p = .845, lamotrigine vs. lithium). Agreement between the polarities of the first-observed subsyndromal symptom and subsequent intervention for mood episode was statistically significant (p < .001). CONCLUSION: Subsyndromal symptoms are common during maintenance treatment and appear to be associated with relapse into an episode of the same polarity. Both lithium and lamotrigine delayed the onset of subsyndromal symptoms and the time from onset of subsyndromal symptoms to subsequent relapse. Further study to assess whether treatment intervention can minimize subsyndromal symptoms or prevent relapse is encouraged.

Adult↗
PubMed1994

Intravenous iloprost infusion in patients with Raynaud phenomenon secondary to systemic sclerosis. A multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of iloprost, a prostacyclin analog, administered intravenously in patients with Raynaud phenomenon secondary to systemic sclerosis. DESIGN: Multicenter, randomized, parallel placebo-controlled, double-blind study. SETTING: University medical centers. PATIENTS: 131 patients with systemic sclerosis (101 women, 30 men) ages 20 to 79 years. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned to receive one of two parallel treatments of five daily sequential, 6-hour intravenous infusions of iloprost (0.5 to 2.0 ng/kg per min) or to receive a similar volume of placebo. MEASUREMENTS: Frequency of Raynaud attacks, Raynaud severity score, physician's overall rating of treatment effect, and digital cutaneous lesion healing. RESULTS: Of the 131 patients enrolled, 126 completed the 5-day infusion and 114 (87%) completed at least 6 weeks of follow-up. Sixty-four patients were randomly assigned to receive iloprost and 67 patients, to receive placebo. The mean weekly number of Raynaud attacks decreased 39.1% with iloprost and 22.2% with placebo (P = 0.005). In addition, the mean percentage of improvement in a global Raynaud severity score during the entire 9-week follow-up was greater in patients given iloprost (34.8%) than in those receiving placebo (19.7%) (P = 0.011). The physician's overall rating of treatment effect showed greater improvement with iloprost than with placebo at week 6 (52.4% compared with 27.4%; P = 0.008) and week 9 (60.9% compared with 26.9%; P < 0.001). At week 3, 14.6% more patients receiving iloprost had 50% or more lesions heal compared with those given placebo (95% CI, 0.9% to 30%). During the infusion, 59 (92%) of the patients receiving iloprost had one or more side effects compared with 38 (57%) of the patients receiving placebo. CONCLUSION: Iloprost is effective for the short-term palliation of severe Raynaud phenomenon in patients with systemic sclerosis.

Adult↗