HEGPOL: Randomized, placebo controlled, multicenter, double-blind clinical trial to investigate hepatoprotective effects of glycine in the postoperative phase of liver transplantation [ISRCTN69350312]

BACKGROUND: Kupffer cell-dependent ischemia / reperfusion (I/R) injury after liver transplantation is still of high clinical relevance, as it is strongly associated with primary dysfunction and primary nonfunction of the graft. Glycine, a non-toxic, non-essential amino acid has been conclusively shown in various experiments to prevent both activation of Kupffer cells and reperfusion injury. Based on both experimental and preliminary clinical data this study protocol was designed to further evaluate the early effect of glycine after liver transplantation. METHODS / DESIGN: A prospective double-blinded randomized placebo-controlled multicenter study with two parallel groups in a total of 130 liver transplant recipients was designed to assess the effect of multiple intravenous doses of glycine after transplantation. Primary endpoints in hierarchical order are: peak levels of both aspartat-amino-transaminase (AST) and alanine-amino-transaminase (ALT) as surrogates for the progression of liver related injury, as well as both graft and patient survival up to 2 years after transplantation. Furthermore, the effect of glycine on cyclosporine A-induced nephrotoxicity is evaluated. DISCUSSION: The ongoing clinical trial represents an advanced element of the research chain, along which a scientific hypothesis has to go by, in order to reach the highest level of evidence; a randomized, prospective, controlled double-blinded clinical trial. If the data of this ongoing research project confirm prior findings, glycine would improve the general outcome after liver transplantation

Rationale and design of the randomised clinical trial comparing early medication change (EMC) strategy with treatment as usual (TAU) in patients with Major Depressive Disorder - the EMC trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In Major Depressive Disorder (MDD), the traditional belief of a delayed onset of antidepressants' effects has lead to the concept of current guidelines that treatment durations should be between 3-8 weeks before medication change in case of insufficient outcome. Post hoc analyses of clinical trials, however, have shown that improvement usually occurs within the first 10-14 days of treatment and that such early improvement (Hamilton Depression Rating Scale [HAMD] decrease ≥20%) has a substantial predictive value for final treatment outcome. Even more important, non-improvement (HAMD decrease <20%) after 14 days of treatment was found to be highly predictive for a poor final treatment outcome.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>The EMC trial is a phase IV, multi-centre, multi-step, randomized, observer-blinded, actively controlled parallel-group clinical trial to investigate for the first time prospectively, whether non-improvers after 14 days of antidepressant treatment with an early medication change (EMC) are more likely to attain remission (HAMD-17 ≤7) on treatment day 56 compared to patients treated according to current guideline recommendation (treatment as usual; TAU). In level 1 of the EMC trial, non-improvers after 14 days of antidepressant treatment will be randomised to an EMC strategy or TAU. The EMC strategy for this study schedules a first medication change on day 15; in case of non-improvement between days 15-28, a second medication change will be performed. TAU schedules the first medication change after 28 days in case of non-response (HAMD-17 decrease <50%). Both interventions will last 42 days. In levels 2 and 3, EMC strategies will be compared with TAU strategies in improvers on day 14, who experience a stagnation of improvement during the course of treatment. The trial is supported by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) and will be conducted in cooperation with the BMBF funded Interdisciplinary Centre Clinical Trials (IZKS) at the University Medical Centre Mainz and at six clinical trial sites in Germany.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>If the EMC strategies lead to significantly more remitters, changes of clinical practice, guidelines for the treatment of MDD as well as research settings can be expected.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p><b>Clincaltrials.gov Identifier</b>: NCT00974155; <b>EudraCT</b>: 2008-008280-96.</p

Is Chest X-ray an Adequate Screening Tool for the Diagnosis of Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injury?

Rationale The MARAN (Macular Relocation in Age-related Neovascular disease) trial was planned to assess the effectiveness of full macular relocation (MR) in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD). Design Randomised, prospective, controlled clinical trial. Methods Patients suffering from visual loss because of AMD were randomised to either surgery or a control group receiving standard treatment (observation or photodynamic therapy (PDT)). The primary end point was the change of visual acuity (VA) (ETDRS) 52 weeks after randomisation compared with initial VA, and secondary end points included reading performance, contrast sensitivity, stability of fixation, eye-specific quality of life, and the absolute number of letters read correctly at 52 weeks compared with initial examination. Results Owing to early determination, only 28 patients were included in the study. The study did not show a difference between the two groups with respect to the final visual result or any of the secondary outcomes measured. The study was limited by the low recruitment that was, at least in part, attributed to the inherent risks for those patients randomised to the surgical arm of the study as well as to the emerging new treatments for AMD. Conclusion The results of the MARAN trial failed to recruit a sufficient number of patients and a superiority of surgery over observation or PDT in patients with exudative AMD was not shown. There was a trend that the reading function was superior after surgery. In the light of the new pharmacological treatments, surgical options such as MR will be an option for only selected cases. © 2010 Macmillan Publishers Limited All rights reserved.link_to_subscribed_fulltex