BackgroundInterleukin-1 (IL-1) is a key mediator of ischaemic brain injury induced by stroke and subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH). IL-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1Ra) limits brain injury in experimental stroke and reduces plasma inflammatory mediators associated with poor outcome in ischaemic stroke patients. Intravenous (IV) IL-1Ra crosses the blood–brain barrier (BBB) in patients with SAH, to achieve cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) concentrations that are neuroprotective in rats.MethodsA small phase II, double-blind, randomised controlled study was carried out across two UK neurosurgical centres with the aim of recruiting 32 patients. Adult patients with aneurysmal SAH, requiring external ventricular drainage (EVD) within 72 hours of ictus, were eligible. Patients were randomised to receive IL-1Ra (500 mg bolus, then a 10 mg/kg/hr infusion for 24 hours) or placebo. Serial samples of CSF and plasma were taken and analysed for inflammatory mediators, with change in CSF IL-6 between 6 and 24 hours as the primary outcome measure.ResultsSix patients received IL-1Ra and seven received placebo. Concentrations of IL-6 in CSF and plasma were reduced by one standard deviation in the IL-1Ra group compared to the placebo group, between 6 and 24 hours, as predicted by the power calculation. This did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.08 and P = 0.06, respectively), since recruitment did not reach the target figure of 32. No adverse or serious adverse events reported were attributable to IL-1Ra.ConclusionsIL-1Ra appears safe in SAH patients. The concentration of IL-6 was lowered to the degree expected, in both CSF and plasma for patients treated with IL-1Ra.
The naturally occurring antagonist of interleukin-1, IL-1RA, is highly neuroprotective experimentally, shows few adverse effects, and inhibits the systemic acute phase response to stroke. A single regime pilot study showed slow penetration into cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) at experimentally therapeutic concentrations. Twenty-five patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) and external ventricular drains were sequentially allocated to five administration regimes, using intravenous bolus doses of 100 to 500 mg and 4 hours intravenous infusions of IL-1RA ranging from 1 to 10 mg per kg per hour. Choice of regimes and timing of plasma and CSF sampling was informed by pharmacometric analysis of pilot study data. Data were analyzed using nonlinear mixed effects modeling. Plasma and CSF concentrations of IL-1RA in all regimes were within the predicted intervals. A 500-mg bolus followed by an intravenous infusion of IL-1RA at 10 mg per kg per hour achieved experimentally therapeutic CSF concentrations of IL-1RA within 45 minutes. Experimentally, neuroprotective CSF concentrations in patients with SAH can be safely achieved within a therapeutic time window. Pharmacokinetic analysis suggests that IL-1RA transport across the blood–CSF barrier in SAH is passive. Identification of the practicality of this delivery regime allows further studies of efficacy of IL-1RA in acute cerebrovascular disease.
Background Blinding, random sequence generation, and allocation concealment are established strategies to minimize bias in RCTs. Meta-epidemiological studies of drug trials have demonstrated exaggerated treatment effects in RCTs where such methods were not employed. As blinding is more difficult in surgical trials it is important to determine whether this applies to them. The study aimed to investigate this using systematic meta-epidemiological methods. Method The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was searched for systematic reviews of RCTs that compared laparoscopic and open abdominal surgical procedures. Each review was then scrutinized to determine whether at least one of the included trials was blinded. Eligible reviews were updated and individual RCTs retrieved. Extracted data included the primary outcomes of interest (length of stay and complications), secondary outcomes and a risk of bias assessment. A multistep meta-regression analysis was then performed to obtain an overall difference in the reported outcome differences between trials that employed each bias-minimization strategy, and those that did not. Results Some 316 RCTs were included, reporting on eight different procedures. Patient-blinded RCTs reported a smaller difference in length of stay between laparoscopic and open groups (difference of standardized mean differences –0·36 (95 per cent c.i. –0·73 to 0·00)) and complications (ratio of odds ratios 0·76 (95 per cent c.i. 0·61 to 0·93)). Blinding of postoperative carers and outcome assessors had similar effects. Conclusion Lack of blinding significantly altered the treatment effect estimates of RCTs comparing laparoscopic and open surgery. Blinding should be implemented in surgical RCTs where possible to avoid systematic bias.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.