Tetrabenazine as antichorea therapy in Huntington disease: a randomized controlled trial. A group randomized trial to improve safe use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. A controlled trial of fluoxetine in nondepressed patients with Huntington's disease. Two double-blind placebo-controlled pilot studies of eicosapentaenoic acid in the treatment of schizophrenia. Aripiprazole augmentation in major depressive disorder: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study in patients with inadequate response to antidepressants. Antipsychotic efficacy of the antidepressant trimipramine: a randomized, double-blind comparison with the phenothiazine perazine. Co-administration of an ACE-inhibitor (moexipril) and hormonal replacement therapy in postmenopausal women. Usefulness of specific immunotherapy in patients with severe perennial allergic rhinitis induced by house dust mite: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. A Quality Use of Medicines program for general practitioners and older people: a cluster randomised controlled trial. The efficacy and safety of aripiprazole as adjunctive therapy in major depressive disorder: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. A randomised, placebo-controlled, double blind study of treatment of Huntington's disease with unsaturated fatty acids. A double-blind study of lorazepam versus the combination of haloperidol and lorazepam in managing agitation. Rational prescribing in primary care (RaPP): a cluster randomized trial of a tailored intervention. Ethyl-eicosapentaenoic acid in first-episode psychosis: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial. The efficacy and safety of aripiprazole as adjunctive therapy in major depressive disorder: a second multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. The dementia antipsychotic withdrawal trial (DART-AD): long-term follow-up of a randomised placebo-controlled trial. A 1-year, placebo-controlled, double-blind house-dust-mite immunotherapy study in asthmatic adults. Combination therapy with albendazole and praziquantel versus albendazole alone in children with seizures and single lesion neurocysticercosis: a randomized, placebo-controlled double blind trial. Multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial assessing the efficacy and safety of proton pump inhibitor lansoprazole in infants with symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Effect of docosahexaenoic acid-containing food administration on symptoms of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder - a placebo-controlled double-blind study.
Tetrabenazine (TBZ) selectively depletes central monoamines by reversibly binding to the type 2 vesicular monoamine transporter. Open-label reports indicate TBZ is effective in treating chorea.
                To examine the safety, efficacy, and dose tolerability of TBZ for treating chorea in Huntington disease (HD).
                The authors randomized 84 ambulatory patients with HD to receive TBZ (n = 54) or placebo (n = 30) for 12 weeks. TBZ was increased over 7 weeks up to a maximum of 100 mg/day or until the desired antichoreic effect occurred or intolerable adverse effects supervened. The primary outcome was the change from baseline in the chorea score of the Unified Huntington's Disease Rating Scale (UHDRS) RESULTS: TBZ treatment resulted in a reduction of 5.0 units in chorea severity compared with a reduction of 1.5 units on placebo treatment (adjusted mean effect size = -3.5 +/- 0.8 UHDRS units [mean +/- SE]; 95% CI: -5.2, -1.9; p < 0.0001). There was also a significant benefit on ratings of clinical global improvement. There were five study withdrawals in the TBZ group and five serious adverse events (SAEs) in four subjects (drowning suicide, complicated fall, restlessness/suicidal ideation, and breast cancer) compared with one withdrawal and no SAEs in the placebo group.
                Tetrabenazine (TBZ), at adjusted dosages of up to 100 mg/day, effectively lessens chorea in ambulatory patients with Huntington disease. TBZ should be dosed individually based on ongoing assessment of possible adverse side effects. To determine whether audit/feedback and educational materials improve adherence to recommendations for laboratory monitoring and cytoprotective agents to detect and prevent adverse events caused by nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents (NSAIDs).
                Controlled, cluster-randomized trial.
                Physicians commonly prescribing NSAIDs were identified within a large managed care organization and randomized to a control or an intervention group (audit/feedback with peer-derived benchmarks and continuing medical education). Medical records were examined 10 months before and after the intervention for clinical data and receipt of complete blood count (CBC), creatinine testing, and cytoprotective agents (process measures). Primary analysis compared intervention versus control physicians among those who initially performed below a peer-derived benchmark. General estimating equations accounted for patient clustering.
                Of 101 physicians initially randomized, 85 remained eligible (38 internists, 36 family physicians, 11 rheumatologists) postintervention. Mean percent change in performance between intervention and control physicians for CBC monitoring was 16% versus 10%; for creatinine monitoring, 0% versus 17%; and use of cytoprotective agents, -3% versus -1%. None of these changes were significant. Rheumatology specialty, number of NSAID prescriptions and physician visits, and patient risk factors for NSAID-related toxicity were more strongly associated with improved safety practices than the intervention.
                Audit/feedback and educational materials had no observed effect on improving NSAID-related safety practices. Potentially contributing factors include high baseline performance (ceiling effect), dilution of the intervention effect by case mix and provider factors, nonreceipt of intervention materials, and diverse indications for lab tests. To examine the antidepressant specificity of fluoxetine in Huntington's disease (HD), we carried out a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of this medication in nondepressed HD patients. Thirty patients with early HD who were depressed (Hamilton Depression Inventory < 16) were randomized to placebo (N = 13) or fluoxetine 20 mg/day (N = 17) and were followed up for 4 months. Outcome measures included changes in total functional capacity (TFC) and in standardized neurological, cognitive, and behavioral ratings. After adjustment for the higher education level found in the placebo group at baseline, no differences between the treatment groups were found in TFC, neurological, or cognitive ratings. Fluoxetine-treated patients did show a slight reduction in agitation and in the need for routine. Although fluoxetine may be a useful antidepressant in depressed HD patients, it failed to exert substantial clinical benefits in nondepressed HD patients. Evidence that the metabolism of phospholipids and polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) is abnormal in schizophrenia provided the rationale for intervention studies using PUFA supplementation. An initial open label study indicating efficacy for n-3 PUFA in schizophrenia led to two small double-blind pilot studies. The first study was designed to distinguish between the possible effects of two different n-3 PUFA: eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docohexaenoic acid (DHA). Forty-five schizophrenic patients on stable antipsychotic medication who were still symptomatic were treated with either EPA, DHA or placebo for 3 months. Improvement on EPA measured by the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) was statistically superior to both DHA and placebo using changes in percentage scores on the total PANSS. EPA was significantly superior to DHA for positive symptoms using ANOVA for repeated measures. In the second placebo-controlled study, EPA was used as a sole treatment, though the use of antipsychotic drugs was still permitted if this was clinically imperative. By the end of the study, all 12 patients on placebo, but only eight out of 14 patients on EPA, were taking antipsychotic drugs. Despite this, patients taking EPA had significantly lower scores on the PANSS rating scale by the end of the study. It is concluded that EPA may represent a new treatment approach to schizophrenia, and this requires investigation by large-scale placebo-controlled trials. Effective management of major depressive disorder (MDD) continues to be a challenging task for psychiatrists and primary care physicians. This trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of adjunctive aripiprazole versus antidepressant monotherapy in patients with MDD and independently replicated the positive findings of two similar trials.
                Patients (N=1,147) with MDD experiencing a major depressive episode and a history of inadequate response to antidepressant monotherapy were enrolled (week 0); 827 received single-blind adjunctive placebo plus open-label antidepressant (escitalopram, fluoxetine, paroxetine controlled release, sertraline, or venlafaxine extended release) for 8 weeks to confirm inadequate response to antidepressants; 349 patients with inadequate response were randomized (1:1) to double-blind, adjunctive placebo (n=172) or adjunctive aripiprazole (n=177; 2-20 mg/day). Primary outcome was the mean change in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Total score from baseline (week 8) to endpoint (week 14).
                Clinically significant improvements in depressive symptoms as assessed by decreases in the MADRS Total score were greater with adjunctive aripiprazole (-10.1) than placebo (-6.4; P<.001). Remission rates were greater for adjunctive aripiprazole than for adjunctive placebo (week 14, 36.8% vs 18.9%; P<.001). Completion rates with adjunctive aripiprazole and placebo were high (83% vs. 87%) and discontinuations due to adverse events were low (6.2% vs 1.7%).
                For some patients with MDD who do not obtain adequate symptom relief with antidepressant monotherapy, adjunctive therapies can significantly improve depressive symptoms. As reported, adjunctive aripiprazole was associated with a two-fold higher remission rate than adjunctive placebo. This, and previous studies, have shown that discontinuations due to adverse events were low and completion rates were high, and has indicated that both antidepressant and aripiprazole in combination were relatively well-tolerated and safe. This is the third consecutive clinical trial, in the absence of a failed trial, to demonstrate that aripiprazole augmentation to antidepressants is an efficacious and well-tolerated treatment for patients with MDD who do not respond adequately to standard antidepressant monotherapy (ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT00105196). The tricyclic antidepressant trimipramine exhibits several features (e. g., dopaminergic effect, molecular structure similar to a neuroleptic, receptor-binding profile similar to clozapine) that suggest its potential as an antipsychotic medication. The aim of the study was to investigate the antipsychotic potential of trimipramine in a controlled clinical trial comparing its antipsychotic efficacy with that of a neuroleptic.
                In a German multi-center, randomized, double-blind trial, the antipsychotic efficacy of trimipramine was compared with that of the phenothiazine neuroleptic perazine, using the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), and Clinical Global Impressions (CGI). Antidepressant efficacy of both agents was measured by use of the Bech-Rafaelsen Melancholia Scale (BRMES). Ninety-five patients with acute schizophrenia (DSM-III-R) and a BPRS total score > 40 at baseline were treated with either 300-400 mg trimipramine or 450-600 mg perazine for 5 weeks.
                Therapeutic equivalence of both treatments (in the dosages used) could not be demonstrated (change in BPRS total score, per-protocol [PP] analysis, one-sided equivalence testing). However, intention-to-treat (ITT) as well as PP analysis showed a statistically significant decrease in the BPRS total scores in both treatment groups (PP: trimipramine, 56.5 +/- 9.8 to 44.1 +/- 17.9; perazine, 56.4 +/- 10.8 to 37.9 +/- 12.9). Significant decreases in all BPRS and PANSS subscores as well as CGI results and response rate support the antipsychotic efficacy of trimipramine. The BRMES total scores significantly decreased in both treatment groups without showing a significant difference between the two agents. Trimipramine was better tolerated than perazine and did not elicit extrapyramidal symptoms.
                Trimipramine failed to exhibit therapeutic equivalence to perazine in the dosages used. However, there was evidence of a substantial antipsychotic effect of trimipramine. It may be a useful medication if depressive symptoms in psychotic patients require antidepressant treatment or if other antipsychotics cannot be administered. Co-administration of antihypertensive drug therapy and hormonal replacement therapy (HRT) is frequent in postmenopausal women but it is not known whether HRT interacts with concomitant antihypertensive therapy. The present study was designed to investigate efficacy and safety of the ACE inhibitor moexipril in comparison to placebo in hypertensive, postmenopausal women on HRT. After a 4-week placebo run-in phase, 95 postmenopausal women (35-74 years of age) who had a sitting diastolic blood pressure (BP) of 95-114 mm Hg and were treated with HRT were randomised to a 12-week treatment with moexipril 15 mg or placebo. Efficacy and safety were assessed by measuring changes in sitting BP and metabolic parameters associated with cardiovascular disease including triglycerides, total cholesterol, HDL, LDL, total cholesterol/HDL ratio and glucose. Adverse events were recorded continuously. After 12 weeks of treatment, moexipril 15 mg was significantly more effective in reducing sitting systolic and diastolic BP from baseline than placebo (-12.2/-9.9 mm Hg vs -1.6/-4.3 mm Hg, P < 0.001). Metabolic parameters were not affected by treatment with moexipril: mean levels of triglycerides, total cholesterol, HDL, LDL, total cholesterol/HDL ratio and glucose remained unchanged throughout the study. Fibrinogen, an independent cardiovascular risk factor, increased after placebo (+35.0 mg/dl) and decreased after treatment with moexipril (-33.6 mg/dl), the difference, however, was not statistically significant. Moexipril was well-tolerated by postmenopausal women using HRT. The most frequent adverse events included headache (21.3%), cough (12.8%) and rhinitis (10.6%) and there were no significant differences in the number and severity of adverse events between the moexipril and placebo groups. This study indicates that moexipril is effective and well tolerated in the treatment of hypertensive, postmenopausal women and can safely be co-administered to HRT. To evaluate the effectiveness of specific immunotherapy (SIT) in patients with severe house dust mite (HDM)-induced perennial allergic rhinitis using diary cards and objective endpoints.
                Thirty-six adult patients were selected with moderate to severe allergic rhinitis due to HDM allergy uncontrolled by regular anti-allergic drugs. Twenty-eight patients completed the study, 22 of these patients also had mild asthma. Subjects were stratified for HDM sensitivity on the basis of their 4-week diary card score and the size of their immediate and late-phase skin reaction to HDM. The groups were well matched for all relevant parameters. Patients were randomized to receive active preparation (Alutard(R)-SQ, ALK, Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus extract) or an identical placebo preparation. Increasing doses were administered until the maintenance dose was reached. This dose was then given once a month for 12 months.
                Clinical efficacy was evaluated by symptom medication diary cards recorded for 4 weeks after 12 months of continuous treatment and compared with pre-treatment scores. Skin test reactivity was re-measured after 12 months of treatment to HDM, cat dander and codeine phosphate. After 1 year of treatment, the actively treated group showed a 58% reduction in diary card symptom scores (P<0.002) and a 20% reduction in the use of rescue medication. The placebo group had a 32% reduction in symptom scores (P=NS), but no reduction in rescue medication requirements. The active group showed 36% reduction in skin prick test sensitivity to D. pteronyssinus (P=0.006), while the placebo group values were unchanged. Skin reactivity to codeine was unchanged in both groups. No significant adverse reactions to SIT were encountered.
                One year of SIT for D. pteronyssinus in patients with poorly controlled rhinitis (+/-mild asthma) produced clinically useful improvement as shown by symptom-medication diary cards and reductions in immediate skin reactions compared with placebo treatment. To investigate the effectiveness of an educational Quality Use of Medicines program, delivered at the level of general practice, on medicines use, falls and quality of life in people aged > or = 65 years.
                Cluster randomised controlled trial conducted in 2002.
                General practices in the Hunter Region, New South Wales, Australia.
                Twenty general practitioners recruited 849 patients to participate in the study.
                Education (academic detailing, provision of prescribing information and feedback); medication risk assessment; facilitation of medication review; financial incentives.
                Primary measures: a composite score reflecting use of benzodiazepines, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and thiazide diuretics; secondary measures: use of medication reviews, occurrence of falls, quality of life (as assessed by SF-12 and EQ-5D survey scores.
                Compared with the control group, participants in the intervention group had increased odds of having an improved medication use composite score (odds ratio [OR], 1.86; 95% CI, 1.21-2.85) at 4-month follow-up but not at 12 months. At 4-month follow-up, the intervention group had reduced odds of using NSAIDs (OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.39-0.99) and showed a non-significant reduction in use of benzodiazepines (OR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.20-1.30) and thiazide diuretics (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.48-1.01). Changes in drug use were not significant at 12-month follow-up. At 12 months, intervention-group participants had lower adjusted ORs (AORs) for having a fall (AOR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.41-0.91), injury (AOR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.32-0.96), and injury requiring medical attention (AOR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.30-0.70). Quality-of-life scores were unaffected by the intervention.
                Education and systems for medication review conducted by GPs can be used to improve use of medicines. These interventions are associated with a reduction in falls among older people, without adverse effects on quality of life. To assess the efficacy and safety of aripiprazole versus placebo as adjunctive treatment to standard antidepressant therapy (ADT) in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) who showed an incomplete response to 1 prospective and 1 to 3 historical courses of ADT within the current episode.
                The study comprised a 7- to 28-day screening phase, an 8-week prospective treatment phase, and a 6-week double-blind treatment phase. Patients with DSM-IV-TR-defined MDD were enrolled between June 16, 2004, and April 27, 2006. During prospective treatment, patients received ADT: escitalopram, fluoxetine, paroxetine controlled-release, sertraline, or venlafaxine extended-release, each with single-blind, adjunctive placebo. Incomplete responders continued ADT and were randomly assigned to double-blind, adjunctive placebo or adjunctive aripiprazole (2-15 mg/day with fluoxetine or paroxetine; 2-20 mg/day with all others). The primary efficacy endpoint was the mean change from end of prospective treatment to end of double-blind treatment (week 14, last observation carried forward) in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score (analysis of covariance).
                A total of 178 patients were randomly assigned to adjunctive placebo and 184 to adjunctive aripiprazole. Baseline demographics were similar between groups (mean MADRS total score of 26.0). Mean change in MADRS total score was significantly greater with adjunctive aripiprazole (-8.8) than adjunctive placebo (-5.8; p < .001). Adverse events (AEs) that occurred in > or = 10% of patients with adjunctive placebo or adjunctive aripiprazole were akathisia (4.5% vs. 23.1%), headache (10.8% vs. 6.0%), and restlessness (3.4% vs. 14.3%). Discontinuations due to AEs were low with adjunctive placebo (1.7%) and adjunctive aripiprazole (2.2%); only 1 adjunctive aripiprazole-treated patient discontinued due to akathisia.
                In patients with MDD who showed an incomplete response to ADT, adjunctive aripiprazole was efficacious and well tolerated.
                ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00095823. Huntington's Disease (HD) is a serious dominantly inherited neurodegenerative disorder for which there are no current treatments. Open label and animal studies have suggested that highly unsaturated fatty acids (HUFAs) may be beneficial. Seventeen patients with HD were entered into a randomised, placebo-controlled, double blind trial of HUFA therapy. Patients were assessed on the Rockland-Simpson Dyskinesia Rating Scale (RSDRS) and the Unified Huntington's Disease Rating Scale (UHDRS). On the RSDRS and the UHDRs motor scale patients on HUFA treatment improved while those on placebo deteriorated, with a significant difference between the two groups on the RSDRS. A similar trend was noted on the UHDRS functional performance scales. Little change was seen on the neuropsychology scales. There were no treatment-related adverse events. This is the first time that a significant improvement has been noted in a randomised trial in HD. The results are consistent with open label observations; a second placebo-controlled study in end-stage patients, and a study in a transgenic mouse model of HD. To compare the utility of intramuscular lorazepam (LZ) with the combination of intramuscular haloperidol (HDL) and LZ to control acutely agitated behavior.
                Randomized double-blind comparison.
                Psychiatric emergency service of a large, university-affiliated, municipal hospital.
                Twenty subjects treated on the psychiatric emergency service.
                Patients received an injection of either LZ 2 mg (11 patients) or HDL 5 mg plus LZ 2 mg (9 patients). The Overt Aggression Scale (OAS), visual analog scales reflecting agitation and hostility, and the Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) severity scale were administered at baseline and 30, 60, 120, and 180 minutes after the injection.
                Planned data comparisons included categoric assignment of patients as improved, as defined by decreases in outcome measures 60 minutes after the injection, as well as continuous variables up to 180 minutes after the injection. A significantly greater percentage of subjects receiving combined treatment improved on the specific measures 60 minutes after dosing (p<0.05). Kaplan-Meier survival analyses showed significant between-group differences in survival curves plotted for the entire study period (p<0.05). Repeated measures analyses of variance studying group differences showed that both groups improved over time, but between-group differences were not significant. The powers of these analyses were low due to the small sample. No serious adverse effects occurred in either treatment group.
                Our results suggest superior efficacy for HDL-LZ over LZ alone. Categoric tests of improvement at 60 minutes provided the strongest evidence of group differences. A gap exists between evidence and practice regarding the management of cardiovascular risk factors. This gap could be narrowed if systematically developed clinical practice guidelines were effectively implemented in clinical practice. We evaluated the effects of a tailored intervention to support the implementation of systematically developed guidelines for the use of antihypertensive and cholesterol-lowering drugs for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease.
                We conducted a cluster-randomized trial comparing a tailored intervention to passive dissemination of guidelines in 146 general practices in two geographical areas in Norway. Each practice was randomized to either the tailored intervention (70 practices; 257 physicians) or control group (69 practices; 244 physicians). Patients started on medication for hypertension or hypercholesterolemia during the study period and all patients already on treatment that consulted their physician during the trial were included. A multifaceted intervention was tailored to address identified barriers to change. Key components were an educational outreach visit with audit and feedback, and computerized reminders linked to the medical record system. Pharmacists conducted the visits. Outcomes were measured for all eligible patients seen in the participating practices during 1 y before and after the intervention. The main outcomes were the proportions of (1) first-time prescriptions for hypertension where thiazides were prescribed, (2) patients assessed for cardiovascular risk before prescribing antihypertensive or cholesterol-lowering drugs, and (3) patients treated for hypertension or hypercholesterolemia for 3 mo or more who had achieved recommended treatment goals. The intervention led to an increase in adherence to guideline recommendations on choice of antihypertensive drug. Thiazides were prescribed to 17% of patients in the intervention group versus 11% in the control group (relative risk 1.94; 95% confidence interval 1.49-2.49, adjusted for baseline differences and clustering effect). Little or no differences were found for risk assessment prior to prescribing and for achievement of treatment goals.
                Our tailored intervention had a significant impact on prescribing of antihypertensive drugs, but was ineffective in improving the quality of other aspects of managing hypertension and hypercholesterolemia in primary care. To investigate if ethyl-eicosapentaenoic acid (E-EPA) augmentation improves antipsychotic efficacy and tolerability in first-episode psychosis (FEP).
                We performed a 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 2-g E-EPA augmentation in 80 FEP patients. Sixty-nine patients were eligible for analysis; a post hoc analysis was computed for a subgroup of nonaffective FEP patients (N = 53). The first participant was included in November 2000 and the last participant completed the trial in August 2003. Primary outcome measures were symptom change scores and time to first response, while tolerability measures and cumulative antipsychotic dose were secondary outcome measures.
                Analysis of covariance controlling for baseline symptoms found no significant mean difference between E-EPA and placebo at week 12 for symptom change scores. Cox regression analysis revealed a significant treatment by diagnosis interaction (p = .024) for time to first response favoring E-EPA in nonaffective psychosis. Post hoc analysis for cumulative response rates further confirmed a higher response rate at week 6 (42.9% [15/35] vs. 17.6% [6/34] for all participants, p = .036; 54.2% [13/24] vs. 17.2% [5/29] for the nonaffective psychosis subset, p = .008); however, the difference at week 12 was no longer significant. Analysis of secondary outcome measures revealed that E-EPA-augmented participants needed 20% less antipsychotic medication between weeks 4 through 6 (p = .03), had less extrapyramidal side effects in the initial 9 weeks (p < .05 for all participants and for all timepoints), and reported less constipation (p = .011) and fewer sexual side effects (p = .016) than those treated with antipsychotic medication alone.
                The findings suggest that E-EPA may accelerate treatment response and improve the tolerability of antipsychotic medications. However, it was not possible to demonstrate a sustained symptomatic benefit of E-EPA in early psychosis, possibly due to a ceiling effect, since a high proportion of first-episode patients already achieve symptomatic remission with antipsychotic medication alone. Further controlled trials in nonaffective early psychosis seem warranted.
                Australian Clinical Trials Registry identifier 12605000267651 (http://actr.org.au). Nonresponse to one or more antidepressants is common and an important public health problem. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of adjunctive aripiprazole or placebo to standard antidepressant therapy (ADT) in patients with major depressive disorder who showed an inadequate response to at least 1 and up to 3 historical and 1 additional prospective ADT. The study comprised a 7-28-day screening, an 8-week prospective treatment, and a 6-week randomization phase. During prospective treatment, patients experiencing a major depressive episode (17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression total score > or = 18) received single-blind adjunctive placebo plus clinicians' choice of ADT (escitalopram, fluoxetine, paroxetine controlled-release, sertraline, or venlafaxine extended-release). Subjects with inadequate response were randomized to adjunctive placebo (n = 190) or adjunctive aripiprazole (n = 191) (starting dose 5 mg/d, dose adjustments 2-20 mg/d, mean end-point dose of 11.0 mg/d). The primary efficacy endpoint was the mean change in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale total score from end of prospective treatment phase to end of randomized treatment phase (last observation carried forward). Mean change in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale total score was significantly greater with adjunctive aripiprazole than placebo (-8.5 vs -5.7; P = 0.001). Remission rates were significantly greater with adjunctive aripiprazole than placebo (25.4% vs 15.2%; P = 0.016) as were response rates (32.4% vs 17.4%; P < 0.001). Adverse events occurring in 10% of patients or more with adjunctive placebo or aripiprazole were akathisia (4.2% vs 25.9%), headache (10.5% vs 9.0%), and fatigue (3.7% vs 10.1%). Incidence of adverse events leading to discontinuation was low (adjunctive placebo [1.1%] vs adjunctive aripiprazole [3.7%]). Aripiprazole is an effective and safe adjunctive therapy as demonstrated in this short-term study for patients who are nonresponsive to standard ADT. Data from 12-week placebo-controlled trials have led to mounting concerns about increased mortality in patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) who are prescribed antipsychotics; however, there are no mortality data from long-term placebo-controlled trials. We aimed to assess whether continued treatment with antipsychotics in people with AD is associated with an increased risk of mortality.
                Between October, 2001, and December, 2004, patients with AD who resided in care facilities in the UK were enrolled into a randomised, placebo-controlled, parallel, two-group treatment discontinuation trial. Participants were randomly assigned to continue with their antipsychotic treatment (thioridazine, chlorpromazine, haloperidol, trifluoperazine, or risperidone) for 12 months or to switch their medication to an oral placebo. The primary outcome was mortality at 12 months. An additional follow-up telephone assessment was done to establish whether each participant was still alive 24 months after the enrollment of the last participant (range 24-54 months). Causes of death were obtained from death certificates. Analysis was by intention to treat (ITT) and modified intention to treat (mITT). This trial is registered with the Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials/National Research Register, number ISRCTN33368770.
                165 patients were randomised (83 to continue antipsychotic treatment and 82 to placebo), of whom 128 (78%) started treatment (64 continued with their treatment and 64 received placebo). There was a reduction in survival in the patients who continued to receive antipsychotics compared with those who received placebo. Cumulative probability of survival during the 12 months was 70% (95% CI 58-80%) in the continue treatment group versus 77% (64-85%) in the placebo group for the mITT population. Kaplan-Meier estimates of mortality for the whole study period showed a significantly increased risk of mortality for patients who were allocated to continue antipsychotic treatment compared with those allocated to placebo (mITT log rank p=0.03; ITT p=0.02). The hazard ratio for the mITT group was 0.58 (95% CI 0.35 to 0.95) and 0.58 (0.36 to 0.92) for the ITT population. The more pronounced differences between groups during periods of follow up longer than 12 months were evident at specific timepoints (24-month survival 46%vs 71%; 36-month survival 30%vs 59%).
                There is an increased long-term risk of mortality in patients with AD who are prescribed antipsychotic medication; these results further highlight the need to seek less harmful alternatives for the long-term treatment of neuropsychiatric symptoms in these patients.
                UK Alzheimer's Research Trust. Thirty-one adult patients with asthma caused by house-dust mites (HDM) were included in this placebo-controlled, double-blind study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of specific immunotherapy (SIT) with biologically standardized extracts of HDM. The specific diagnosis was confirmed by skin prick tests, specific IgE, and bronchial provocation tests with HDM allergens. The patients were randomized to receive active treatment with extracts of either Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus (Dpt) or D. farinae (Dfa) (Alutard SQ, ALK, Denmark) or placebo injections. Twenty-three patients completed the study. After 1 year of treatment, we found a clinically important and significant reduction in both asthma medicine consumption (inhaled steroids 38% and beta 2-agonists 46%) and symptom score (57%) in the actively treated group, but not the placebo group. These findings were confirmed by a significant decrease in skin and bronchial sensitivity to HDM in the active group. Additionally, there was a significant difference in the patients' scores for effect in favor of the actively treated group. Total IgE and specific IgE to HDM showed no significant changes before and after treatment for either group. Spirometric lung-function measurements showed a significant increase in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) from 85% before to 89% of predicted values after treatment for the actively treated group. Peak-flow measurements at home showed no significant changes during the study. It is concluded that allergen SIT is an effective treatment in adult patients suffering from asthma due to HDM. A combination of albendazole and praziquantel was more effective than albendazole alone in destroying Taenia cysts in an animal model. There are no such studies in humans.
                To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a combination of albendazole and praziquantel in children with seizures and single small enhancing computerized tomographic lesions.
                Prospective, interventional, randomized, placebo-controlled, double blind clinical trial at a tertiary hospital in North India.
                : One hundred twelve children with seizures for <3 months and single lesion neurocysticercosis; 9 lost to follow-up.
                All children received albendazole (15 mg/kg/d) for 7 days with either praziquantel or placebo (75 mg/kg/d) for 1 day according to random allocation. Repeat CT scans were done after 1, 3, and 6 months. All children were followed up for at least 6 months.
                Fifty-three children received praziquantel (group A) and 50 placebo (group B). Complete resolution of lesions was seen in 60% and 72% of children at 3 and 6 months in group A versus 42% and 52% of children in group B. Nonresolution and calcification were higher in group B than in group A at 3 months (B: 28%, 14%; A: 12%, 8%) and 6 months (B: 16%, 22%; A: 6%, 9%), but the differences were not statistically significant. Seizure control and side effects were similar in the 2 groups.
                A combination therapy for albendazole and praziquantel was statistically comparable to sole therapy with albendazole in eradicating lesions and preventing seizures. To assess the efficacy and safety of lansoprazole in treating infants with symptoms attributed to gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) that have persisted despite a >or= 1-week course of nonpharmacologic management.
                This multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group study randomized infants with persisting symptoms attributed to GERD to treatment with lansoprazole or placebo for 4 weeks. Symptoms were tracked through daily diaries and weekly visits. Efficacy was defined primarily by a >or= 50% reduction in measures of feeding-related crying and secondarily by changes in other symptoms and global assessments. Safety was assessed based on the occurrence of adverse events (AEs) and clinical/laboratory data.
                Of the 216 infants screened, 162 met the inclusion/exclusion criteria and were randomized. Of those, 44/81 infants (54%) in each group were responders--identical for lansoprazole and placebo. No significant lansoprazole-placebo differences were detected in any secondary measures or analyses of efficacy. During double-blind treatment, 62% of lansoprazole-treated subjects experienced 1 or more treatment-emergent AEs, versus 46% of placebo recipients (P= .058). Serious AEs (SAEs), particularly lower respiratory tract infections, occurred in 12 infants, significantly more frequently in the lansoprazole group compared with the placebo group (10 vs 2; P= .032).
                This study detected no difference in efficacy between lansoprazole and placebo for symptoms attributed to GERD in infants age 1 to 12 months. SAEs, particularly lower respiratory tract infections, occurred more frequently with lansoprazole than with placebo. To investigate whether docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) supplementation was able to ameliorate attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder(AD/HD) symptoms in AD/HD children.
                A placebo-controlled double-blind study with 40 AD/HD (including eight AD/HD-suspected) children of 6-12 y of age who were mostly without medication. Subjects of a DHA group (n=20) took active foods containing fish oil (fermented soybean milk, bread rolls and steamed bread; 3.6 g DHA/week from these foods) for 2 months, whereas those of a control group (n=20) took indistinguishable control foods without fish oil. The following items were measured at the start and end of the study: (1) attention deficit, hyperactivity and impulsivity (AD/HD-related symptoms according to DSM-IV criteria); (2) aggression assessed by both parents and teachers; (3) visual perception (finding symbols out of a table); (4) visual and auditory short-term memory; (5) development of visual-motor integration; (6) continuous performance; (7) impatience.
                Changes in tests 1, 2, 3, 5 and 7 over time did not significantly differ between the two groups. However, visual short-term memory and errors of commission (continuous performance) significantly improved in the control group compared with the changes over time in the DHA group (P=0.02 and 0.001, respectively). Recalculation without AD/HD-suspected subjects (n=4 each group) showed similar P-values with regard to both measures.
                DHA supplementation did not improve AD/HD-related symptoms. Treatment of ADHD with fatty acids deserves further investigation, but careful attention should be paid as to which fatty acid(s) is used.
No intervention proved to have a consistent symptomatic control in HD. Tetrabenazine is the anti-choreic drug with the best quality data available. Other symptomatic areas should be explored by well-designed randomised placebo-controlled studies.