A novel, efficient, randomized selection trial comparing combinations of drug therapy for ALS
- PMID: 18608093
- PMCID: PMC4354803
- DOI: 10.1080/17482960802195632
A novel, efficient, randomized selection trial comparing combinations of drug therapy for ALS
Abstract
Combining agents with different mechanisms of action may be necessary for meaningful results in treating ALS. The combinations of minocycline-creatine and celecoxib-creatine have additive effects in the murine model. New trial designs are needed to efficiently screen the growing number of potential neuroprotective agents. Our objective was to assess two drug combinations in ALS using a novel phase II trial design. We conducted a randomized, double-blind selection trial in sequential pools of 60 patients. Participants received minocycline (100 mg)-creatine (10 g) twice daily or celecoxib (400 mg)-creatine (10 g) twice daily for six months. The primary objective was treatment selection based on which combination best slowed deterioration in the ALS Functional Rating Scale-Revised (ALSFRS-R); the trial could be stopped after one pool if the difference between the two arms was adequately large. At trial conclusion, each arm was compared to a historical control group in a futility analysis. Safety measures were also examined. After the first patient pool, the mean six-month decline in ALSFRS-R was 5.27 (SD=5.54) in the celecoxib-creatine group and 6.47 (SD=9.14) in the minocycline-creatine group. The corresponding decline was 5.82 (SD=6.77) in the historical controls. The difference between the two sample means exceeded the stopping criterion. The null hypothesis of superiority was not rejected in the futility analysis. Skin rash occurred more frequently in the celecoxib-creatine group. In conclusion, the celecoxib-creatine combination was selected as preferable to the minocycline-creatine combination for further evaluation. This phase II design was efficient, leading to treatment selection after just 60 patients, and can be used in other phase II trials to assess different agents.
Conflict of interest statement
Figures
Comment in
-
Commentary on 'a novel, efficient, randomized selection trial comparing combinations of drug therapy for ALS'.Amyotroph Lateral Scler. 2008 Aug;9(4):254-6. doi: 10.1080/17482960802192324. Amyotroph Lateral Scler. 2008. PMID: 18642137 No abstract available.
-
Response to commentary on a novel, efficient, randomized selection trial comparing combinations of drug therapy for ALS.Amyotroph Lateral Scler. 2009 Feb;10(1):author reply 61. doi: 10.1080/17482960802530804. Amyotroph Lateral Scler. 2009. PMID: 18985463 No abstract available.
References
-
- Rowland LP, Shneider NA. Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. N Engl J Med. 2001;344:1688–700. - PubMed
-
- Menzies FM, Ince PG, Shaw PF. Mitochondrial involvement in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Neurochemistry International. 2002;40:543–51. - PubMed
-
- Rothstein JD, Martin LJ, Kuncl RW. Decreased glutamate transport by the brain and spinal cord in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. New Engl J Med. 1992;236:1464–8. - PubMed
-
- Yoshihara T, Ishigaki S, Yamamoto M, Liang Y, Niwa J, Takeuchi H, et al. Differential expression of inflammation-and apoptosis-related genes in spinal cords of a mutant SOD1 transgenic mouse model of familial amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. J Neurochem. 2002;80:158–67. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous