Dexmedetomidine versus propofol/midazolam for long-term sedation during mechanical ventilation

Purpose: To compare dexmedetomidine (DEX) with standard care (SC, either propofol or midazolam) for long-term sedation in terms of maintaining target sedation and length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay. Methods: A pilot, phase III, double-blind multicenter study in randomized medical and surgical patients (n=85) within the first 72h of ICU stay with an expected ICU stay of ≥48h and sedation need for ≥24h after randomization. Patients were assigned to either DEX (≤1.4μgkg−1h−1; n=41) or SC (n=44), with daily sedation stops. Results: Non-inferiority of DEX versus SC was not confirmed. Target Richmond agitation-sedation score (RASS) was reached a median of 64% (DEX) and 63% (SC) of the sedation time (ns). The length of ICU stay was similar in DEX and SC. Patients with RASS target 0-3 (DEX 78%, SC 80%) were at target sedation 74% (DEX) and 64% (SC) of the time (ns), whereas those with RASS target −4 or less reached the target 42% (DEX) and 62% (SC) of the time (P=.006). Post hoc analyses suggested shorter duration of mechanical ventilation for DEX (P=0.025). Conclusions: This pilot study suggests that in long-term sedation, DEX is comparable to SC in maintaining sedation targets of RASS 0 to −3 but not suitable for deep sedation (RASS −4 or less). DEX had no effect on length of ICU stay. Its effects on other relevant clinical outcomes, such as duration of mechanical ventilation, should be tested furthe

Effect of baseline characteristics on mortality in the SURVIVE trial on the effect of levosimendan vs dobutamine in acute heart failure: Sub-analysis of the Finnish patients

Peer reviewe

Oral Levosimendan in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a phase II multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral levosimendan in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) patients. This phase 2, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover, 3-period study with 6 months open-label follow-up enrolled adults with ALS and sitting slow vital capacity (SVC) 60-90% of predicted from 11 sites in four countries. Methods Patients received levosimendan 1 mg daily, 1 mg bd or placebo during three 14-day crossover periods, and levosimendan 1-2 mg daily during open-label follow-up. Primary endpoint was sitting SVC; secondary endpoints included supine SVC, ALS Functional Rating Scale (ALSFRS-R), tolerability and safety. Results Of 66 patients randomised, 59 contributed to the double-blind results and 50 entered open-label follow-up. Sitting SVC was not significantly different between the treatments. In post hoc analysis using period-wise baselines, supine SVC favoured levosimendan over placebo, estimated mean differences from baseline being -3.62% on placebo, +0.77% on levosimendan 1 mg daily (p=0.018) and +2.38% on 1 mg bd (p=0.001). Headache occurred in 16.7% of patients during levosimendan 1 mg daily (p=0.030), 28.6% during 1 mg bd (p=0.002) and 3.3% during placebo. The respective frequencies for increased heart rate were 5.1% (p=0.337), 18.5% (p=0.018) and 1.7%. No significant differences between the treatments were seen for other adverse events. Conclusions Levosimendan did not achieve the primary endpoint of improving sitting SVC in ALS. Headache and increased heart rate were increased on levosimendan, although it was otherwise well tolerated. A phase 3 study to evaluate the longer-term effects of oral levosimendan in ALS is ongoing

A prospective, double-blind, pilot, randomized, controlled trial of an "embodied" virtual reality intervention for adults with low back pain

Adults with chronic low back pain, disability, moderate-to-severe pain, and high fear of movement and reinjury were recruited into a trial of a novel, automated, digital therapeutics, virtual reality, psychological intervention for pain (DTxP). We conducted a 3-arm, prospective, double-blind, pilot, randomized, controlled trial comparing DTxP with a sham placebo comparator and an open-label standard care. Participants were enrolled for 6 to 8 weeks, after which, the standard care control arm were rerandomized to receive either the DTxP or sham placebo. Forty-two participants completed assessments at baseline, immediately posttreatment (6-8 weeks), 9-week, and 5-month follow-up. We found that participants in the DTxP group reported greater reductions in fear of movement and better global impression of change when compared with sham placebo and standard care post treatment. No other group differences were noted at posttreatment or follow-up. When compared with baseline, participants in the DTxP group reported lower disability at 5-month follow-up, lower pain interference and fear of movement post treatment and follow-up, and lower pain intensity at posttreatment. The sham placebo group also reported lower disability and fear of movement at 5-month follow-up compared with baseline. Standard care did not report any significant changes. There were a number of adverse events, with one participant reporting a serious adverse event in the sham placebo, which was not related to treatment. No substantial changes in medications were noted, and participants in the DTxP group reported positive gaming experiences

Darolutamide and health-related quality of life in patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer : An analysis of the phase III ARAMIS trial

Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.BACKGROUND: In the ARAMIS trial, darolutamide plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) versus placebo plus ADT significantly improved metastasis-free survival (MFS), overall survival (OS) and time to pain progression in patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). Herein, we present analyses of patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III trial randomised patients with nmCRPC and prostate-specific antigen doubling time ≤10 months to darolutamide 600 mg (n = 955) twice daily or matched placebo (n = 554) while continuing ADT. The primary end-point was MFS; the secondary end-points included OS and time to pain progression. In this analysis, HRQoL was assessed by the time to deterioration using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) prostate cancer subscale (PCS) and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Prostate Cancer Module (EORTC QLQ-PR25) subscales. RESULTS: Darolutamide significantly prolonged time to deterioration of FACT-P PCS versus placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70-0.91; P = 0.0005) at the primary analysis (cut-off date: 3rd September 2018). Time to deterioration of EORTC QLQ-PR25 outcomes showed statistically significant delays with darolutamide versus placebo for urinary (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.54-0.76; P < 0.0001) and bowel (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.66-0.92; P = 0.0027) symptoms. Time to worsening of hormonal treatment-related symptoms was similar between the two groups. CONCLUSION: In patients with nmCRPC who are generally asymptomatic, darolutamide maintained HRQoL by significantly delaying time to deterioration of prostate cancer-specific quality of life and disease-related symptoms versus placebo.publishersversionPeer reviewe

Efficacy and Safety of Darolutamide in Patients with Nonmetastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer Stratified by Prostate-specific Antigen Doubling Time : Planned Subgroup Analysis of the Phase 3 ARAMIS Trial

Background: Patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) have a high risk of progression to metastatic disease, particularly if their prostate-specific antigen doubling time (PSADT) is ≤6 mo. However, patients remain at a high risk with a PSADT of >6 mo. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of darolutamide versus placebo in patients stratified by PSADT >6 or ≤6 mo. Design, setting, and participants: A planned subgroup analysis of a global multicenter, double-blind, randomized, phase 3 trial in men with nmCRPC and PSADT ≤10 mo was conducted. Intervention: Patients were randomized 2:1 to oral darolutamide 600 mg twice daily or placebo, while continuing androgen-deprivation therapy. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The primary endpoint was metastasis-free survival (MFS). Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and times to pain progression, first cytotoxic chemotherapy, and symptomatic skeletal events. Quality of life (QoL) was measured using validated prostate-relevant tools. Safety was recorded throughout the study. Results and limitations: Of 1509 patients enrolled, 469 had PSADT >6 mo (darolutamide n = 286; placebo n = 183) and 1040 had PSADT ≤6 mo (darolutamide n = 669; placebo n = 371). Baseline characteristics were balanced between subgroups. Darolutamide significantly prolonged MFS versus placebo in both subgroups (unstratified hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]: PSADT >6 mo, 0.38 [0.26–0.55]; PSADT ≤6 mo, 0.41 [0.33–0.52]). OS and other efficacy and QoL endpoints favored darolutamide with significant improvement over placebo in both subgroups. The incidence of adverse events, including events commonly associated with androgen receptor inhibitors (fractures, falls, hypertension, and mental impairment), and discontinuations due to adverse events were low and similar to placebo. Limitations include small subgroup populations. Conclusions: In patients with nmCRPC and PSADT >6 mo (maximum 10 mo), darolutamide provided a favorable benefit/risk ratio, characterized by significant improvements in MFS, OS, and other clinically relevant endpoints; maintenance of QoL; and favorable tolerability. Patient summary: In patients with prostate cancer that has stopped responding to standard hormonal therapy (indicated by an increase in prostate-specific antigen [PSA] levels), there is a risk that the cancer will spread to other parts of the body. This risk is highest when the time it takes for the PSA level to double (ie, “PSA doubling time” [PSADT]) is less than 6 mo. However, there is still a risk that the cancer will spread even if the PSADT is longer than 6 mo. In a group of patients whose PSADT was more than 6 mo but no more than 10 mo, treatment with darolutamide slowed the cancer spread and allowed them to live longer than patients who received placebo (inactive drug). Darolutamide treatment did not cause many side effects and helped maintain patients’ quality of life without disruptions.publishedVersionPeer reviewe