AzTrials
AzTrials

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary DiseaseNCT00737698

Comparison of Repetitive Magnetic Stimulation and Exercise on Quadriceps Function in COPD

A study testing Exercise and Repetitive magnetic stimulation in people with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, run by Imperial College London at 1 site in United Kingdom.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Background Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) patients develop leg weakness and a reduced walking capacity, due to reduced leg muscle oxygen-utilising capacity (OUC). Animal experiments indicate that low muscle levels of Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptors (PPAR) cause the reduced muscle OUC. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Any ageHealthy volunteers can take part
Conditions the study is for
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
What is being tested?
Exercise and Repetitive magnetic stimulation
Type of treatment
Injection or infusion
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
86 participants
Where
1 siteUnited Kingdom
Study dates
Jan 2007to Oct 2010
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages Any age
  • All sexes
  • Healthy volunteers accepted
  • Child, Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Who cannot join

  • Cardiac failure
  • Renal failure
  • Liver failure
  • Diabetes mellitus
  • Systemic inflammatory diseases eg Rheumatoid arthritis, SLE
  • Warfarin, coagulation problems

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

United Kingdom1 site
  • Respiratory Muscle Lab, Royal Brompton Hospital, Fulham Road

    London, SW3 6NP

Other trials in United Kingdom

About this study

Official title: Is the Anaerobic Quadriceps Muscle Phenotype in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Mediated by Reduced Muscle Concentrations of Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptors Alpha and Delta?

Background Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) patients develop leg weakness and a reduced walking capacity, due to reduced leg muscle oxygen-utilising capacity (OUC). Animal experiments indicate that low muscle levels of Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptors (PPAR) cause the reduced muscle OUC.

Aims

Read more

In COPD patients, investigate whether:

  1. reduced muscle PPAR levels cause reduced leg muscle OUC, by investigating a correlation between these in muscle samples (Study 1).
  2. training increases muscle PPAR levels in proportion to increases in OUC, as should occur if PPARs control OUC (Study 2).
  3. muscle PPAR levels and walking capacity correlate (Study 1 and 2).
  4. the new technique of repetitive stimulation of the nerve to the leg with a magnet (rMS) improves muscle OUC (Study 2).

Study 1 Leg weakness and walking ability are assessed in 75 patients, then a leg muscle sample is taken to measure PPARs and OUC.

Study 2 60 Study 1 patients have either cardiovascular training, rMS, or no training, for 8 weeks, then are re-studied as in Study 1.

Importance If reduced PPAR levels correspond with leg weakness, medicines can be developed to target these receptors and treat weakness. If rMS is effective, it can be offered to patients.

Read the detailed description

There has been considerable interest in finding methods of improving quadriceps function in COPD, since quadriceps dysfunction is associated with reduced exercise capacity5 and survival in patients16, independently of lung function. Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) courses comprising exercise and education can increase oxidative enzymes, strength and endurance of the quadriceps in patients with COPD17 and improve walking capacity even over a period of 8 weeks12, 18. However, PR is not a complete solution: not all regions of the UK offer PR, PR only has on average a 50% uptake rate by patients and the drop-out rate is 30%. Also a significant proportion of patients (about 30%) do not increase their exercise capacity as a result of PR19, perhaps because breathlessness limits the training they complete or their peripheral muscle strength is normal19. Therefore, there is interest in alternative treatments or add-ons to exercise, particularly in terms of localised muscle treatments that are not limited by impaired respiratory function. Repetitive electrical stimulation of the femoral nerve (rES) appears to be an effective alternative method of passively training the quadriceps muscle. 30 minutes rES at 10Hz five times a week to both legs increased muscle strength and exercise performance in patients with COPD21 and those with heart failure22. Similar results have been achieved with fifteen minutes of repetitive magnetic stimulation of the femoral nerve (rMS) three times a week23. However, treatment studies with rES to investigate effects on exercise performance have often used separate treatment and control groups which introduces inter-subject differences into studies already limited by sample size243 and have only used voluntary measures of quadriceps function96. The only biopsy study of rES used a cross-over design but biopsies were only taken before and after the rES training period and not before and after the control period.244 The rMS study involved a total of eighteen subjects (ten assigned to rMS, eight to control) and biopsies were not taken to evaluate histological changes in the muscle. With this study, I sought primarily to evaluate the changes in quadriceps fibre characteristics as a result of an intensive rMS protocol, and secondarily, compare changes in quadriceps function as the result of rMS with the clinical gold standard for improving muscle function, PR.

Methods

Ethical approval The Research Ethics Committee of the Ealing \& West London Mental Health Trust approved the study (06/Q0410/54). The trial was registered with National Clinical Trials Database (NCT 00737698). 2.13.1

Sample size calculation The sample size required for the training study was based on power calculations from a previous study on PR from our group221 and pilot data from our group on the effect of rMS on muscle strength (Swallow et al, unpublished) using Stata 10 statistical software. The power calculations were based on functional improvements (increase of 54m on 6MW as a result of PR and 10% increase in quadriceps TwQ as a result of rMS, as the minimum clinically significant increments) rather than increases in muscle fibre CSA or type I fibre proportions as the data for the latter was not available. We chose an increase of 10% twitch force as the minimally significant increment as previous data from Mador et al showed a 9.7% increase in twitch force as the result of 8 weeks PR17. A conventional power of 80% with a two-tailed p value of ≤0.05 was chosen indicating that a minimum of ten patients were required for the PR arm and twenty six for the rMS arm. We aimed to recruit fifteen to the PR group and thirty to the rMS group to allow for patient drop-out at the rates we have previously encountered. At completion, there were seventeen in the PR group and thirty seven in the rMS group.

Subject selection Eighty six COPD patients consented for the cross-sectional study also consented for the training study therefore the inclusion and exclusion criteria were as for the cross-sectional study. Patients were precluded from starting any new exercise regimen or new regular medication from consent to completion of the study, and patients were encouraged to contact me on day 1 of an acute exacerbation so appropriate treatment could be instituted. The study design and flow of participants through the study are shown in Fig. 4.1 and 4.2.

Randomisation FFMI was calculated using bioelectrical impedance (Methods chapter Section 2.4.2.1) and patients stratified into low FFMI (<15 kg/m2 for females, <16 kg/m2 for males) and normal FFMI. The low and normal FFMI groups were randomised separately (so low FFMI patients were evenly distributed between treatment groups) using a sealed envelope system and a block of 4 procedure weighted 2:1:1 for rMS: PR: no active treatment as the power calculation suggested that at least twice as many patients were required in the PR arm as the rMS arm.

Pre-training assessments Lung function, FFMI, quadriceps strength, quadriceps endurance, physical activity and 6MW and maximal cycle ergometry performance and HRQOL measurements were performed as described in the Methods chapter Sections 2.4-2.7. Percutaneous biopsy of the quadriceps and muscle fibre type analysis were performed. Patients underwent the pre-training physiological assessment and biopsies within four weeks of randomisation. The assessment was as described for the cross-sectional study (in the rMS group both legs were tested on the same day, in the other two groups the leg ipsilateral to the dominant hand was tested) and then patients proceeded to their allocated treatment within two weeks.

Training protocols

Repetitive magnetic stimulation of the femoral nerve (rMS) This was delivered using the Magstim Rapid magnetic nerve stimulator system (Magstim, Whitland Dyfed, UK) and supervised by myself at RBH Muscle Lab. The patient sat upright or reclined slightly backwards with the mat coil wrapped round the body of the quadriceps muscle to be trained, with the foot of the leg being stimulated positioned in a strap so that the contractions were isometric (Fig. 2.8). The stimulation frequency was 40Hz with a duty cycle of 0.4 (1s on, 4s off). Patients had three hours continuous rMS (apart from toilet breaks) twice a week over an 8-week period with at least twenty four hours rest between sessions. At the first session the stimulus intensity was increased from 22% power to 40% power, and subsequent sessions were at 40% power as this was the upper limit of what patients could tolerate and the machine could deliver for the whole session. 40% power generally generated between 10-20% of the patient's MVC.

Pulmonary Rehabilitation (PR) This was run by a research respiratory physiotherapist at the Royal Brompton Hospital twice a week with a maximum of three patients per session so training was closely supervised. Training consisted of a warm-up, then one hour aerobic work with subjects exercising on a stationery bicycle at a workload that produced 80% of their peak VO2 on a maximal incremental cycle ergometry protocol, on a treadmill, climbing stairs, and a combination of leg resistance exercises involving leg weights, squats and sit-to-stand manoeuvres, followed by a cool-down. Attempts were made at each session to increase the intensity and/or number of repetitions of each exercise. The exercise sheet used by the supervising physiotherapist to chart achievements is shown in Fig. 2.9.

No active treatment (Controls) Controls were asked to continue with their usual activities and were contacted by telephone two to three times during the 8-week period to minimise drop-out and to monitor for acute exacerbations of COPD. After study completion, these patients were enrolled on the PR course at RBH if they wished.

Post-training assessments For the PR and rMS groups, the physiological tests were done four to five days after the last training session, and three to four days later the biopsies were taken. Controls were assessed in the same week as the others. The timing was aimed at minimising group differences from varying delays between the last training session and testing. Post-training assessments involved all the same tests as the pre-training assessment.

Statistical analysis The primary outcomes measures were a) change in quadriceps fibre proportions and fibre CSA in trained leg versus untrained leg in rMS group and b) change in quadriceps function in rMS group versus PR group. All statistical analysis was performed using SPSS (SPSS 15, Chicago, USA). The Mann-Whitney U test was used to assess group differences (patients vs controls, trained vs untrained leg, change in trained leg vs change in untrained leg), Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was calculated to assess correlations and the Wilcoxon Signed-Ranks test used to examine differences between pre and post-training results in both the trained and the untrained leg (data not normally distributed). An interaction factor was calculated to assess the effect of exacerbation during the study. A two-tailed p value of ≤0.05 was used to define statistical significance.

Being tested
Exercise, Repetitive magnetic stimulation
Keywords
COPD, exercise, repetitive magnetic stimulation, quadriceps strength
Medical subject headings
Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive, Motor Activity

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • ExerciseOther

    Physiotherapist-supervised exercise course (endurance and resistance exercises) for 2 hours twice a week for 8 weeks

  • Repetitive magnetic stimulationOther

    Repetitive magnetic stimulation of the intramuscular branches of the femoral nerve for 3 hours twice a week for 8 weeks

Study groups in NCT00737698
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
ExerciseExperimentalExercise
Receives: Other: Exercise
Repetitive magnetic stimulationExperimentalRepetitive magnetic stimulation of femoral nerve
Receives: Other: Repetitive magnetic stimulation
ControlNo interventionNo active treatment

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Quadriceps Fibre Size of Type IIa Fibres

    Quadriceps fibre cross-sectional area type II a fibres in quadriceps fibre.

    Measured: 8 weeks

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted19 Aug 2008 (estimated)
  2. Study startJan 2007
  3. Primary completionOct 2008
  4. Study completionOct 2010

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Basic science
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
86 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT00737698
Sponsor's protocol ID
rMS v exercise in COPD
Status last verified
Sep 2023
First submitted
18 Aug 2008
Last updated
28 Sep 2023
Data monitoring committee
No
Individual data sharing
No

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Exercise and Repetitive magnetic stimulation in people with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, run by Imperial College London at 1 site in United Kingdom.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 6 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 28 Sep 2023. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in United Kingdom. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 16 Sep 2019). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Quadriceps Fibre Size of Type IIa Fibres (time frame: 8 weeks). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 28 Sep 2023; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 5 Nov 2026.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in