Cutaneous LeishmaniasisPhase 2/3NCT01301924
Comparison of Standard and Alternative Antimonial Dosage in Patients With American Cutaneous Leishmaniasis
A Phase 2/3 study testing Meglumine antimoniate in people with Cutaneous Leishmaniasis, run by Oswaldo Cruz Foundation at 1 site in Brazil.
Trial summary
"Phase III Clinical Trial for American Tegumentary Leishmaniasis: Comparison of Standard and Alternative Antimonial Dosage in Patients With American Cutaneous Leishmaniasis " has begun in October 2008 at the Laboratory of Leishmaniasis Surveillance at Evandro Chagas Clinical Research Institute (IPEC), FIOCRUZ, aiming… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 13 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Cutaneous Leishmaniasis
- What is being tested?
- Meglumine antimoniate
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 72 participants
- Where
- 1 siteBrazil
- Study dates
- Oct 2008to Dec 2017
- Phase
- Phase 2/3
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
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 13 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Cutaneous leishmaniasis with parasitological diagnosis by one or more of the following methods: direct examination (scraping or imprint), histopathology, culture, immunohistochemistry, or PCR.
- History of exposure in an endemic area of Rio de Janeiro
- Absence of prior treatment with meglumine antimoniate
Who cannot join
- women who do not use contraceptives or do it inadequately
- pregnant
- under 13
- prior treatment with meglumine antimoniate
- use of immunosuppressive therapy (steroids, cancer chemotherapy) or medicines for tuberculosis or leprosy.
- presence of changes in baseline clinical adverse effect level equivalent to> G3
- presence of changes in baseline laboratory adverse effect level equivalent to> G2
- presence of baseline electrocardiographic changes equivalent to an adverse effect level> G4 and / or baseline QTc> 0.46 ms (equivalent to AS level G1).
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Phase III Clinical Trial for American Tegumentary Leishmaniasis: Comparison of Standard and Alternative Antimonial Dosage in Patients With American Cutaneous Leishmaniasis
"Phase III Clinical Trial for American Tegumentary Leishmaniasis: Comparison of Standard and Alternative Antimonial Dosage in Patients With American Cutaneous Leishmaniasis " has begun in October 2008 at the Laboratory of Leishmaniasis Surveillance at Evandro Chagas Clinical Research Institute (IPEC), FIOCRUZ, aiming to compare efficacy and safety of the standard recommended schedule with an alternative dosage scheme of meglumine antimoniate in the treatment of American tegumentary leishmaniasis (ATL). It is a study with blind evaluation by the doctors and the responsible for statistical analysis. Patients diagnosed with ATL, eligible for the trial are randomly allocated into one of the schemes with meglumine antimoniate and monitored before, during and after it. There is no single regimen applicable to all forms of leishmaniasis around the world. Therapeutic regimens applied to treat people living in other geographic areas result in mixed outcomes. Ideally, the most appropriate regimens should be established for each endemic area, based on its efficacy, toxicity, difficulties of administration and cost. Given the problems and limitations of the use of pentavalent antimonials (Sb5+) at 20 mg Sb5+ / kg / day, less toxic alternative regimens, i.e. 5mg Sb5+/kg/day, deserve to be better evaluated. The treatment of ATL must heal skin lesions and prevent late mucosal lesion development. The indication of high doses of Sb5+ is based on the evidence that there could be induction of resistance with use of subdoses. However, clinical studies with extended follow-up in Rio de Janeiro have suggested that regular low doses (5mg Sb5+ / kg / day) may constitute an effective scheme, achieving cure rates similar to higher doses, with lower toxicity, ease of implementation and lower cost. Published studies on efficacy and safety of alternative dosage schemes with meglumine antimoniate failed to provide conclusive results so far, for various methodological biases. The need to compare the effectiveness and safety between the standard treatment scheme with meglumine antimoniate currently recommended in Brazil for the treatment of ATL and an alternative scheme with low doses of antimony is the motive for this study in Rio de Janeiro.
Read the detailed description
- Introduction. Pentavalent antimonials are first line drugs for the treatment of leishmaniasis. WHO and Brazilian Ministry of Health recommend treating patients with cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) with doses of 20mg/kg/day, IM or IV, for three to four weeks. In the Reference Centre on Leishmaniasis - IPEC - FIOCRUZ, the dose of 5mg/kg/day IM has been effective and well tolerated in the treatment of CL. CL is treated for 30 days, with a lower incidence of adverse effects and lower treatment dropout rates. In all cases patients should be monitored with clinical examination, electrocardiogram (EKG), blood count, liver, renal and pancreatic function tests. Some side effects can be observed, although they not necessarily lead to discontinuation of treatment. EKG most frequent abnormalities are heart rhythm and disturbances of ventricular repolarization: flattening or inversion of T wave and adjusted QT space widening.
- Background: Ideally, the most appropriate antimoniate therapeutic regimens should be established for each area, based on their efficacy and toxicity, without ignoring the difficulties of administration and cost. The treatment of CL must achieve healing of skin lesions and prevention of late mucosal involvement. The recognition, recommendation and acceptance of new regimens should be preceded by demonstration of their superiority to currently recommended treatments. We aim to compare the effectiveness and safety among treatment schemes with meglumine antimoniate currently recommended in Brazil for the treatment of CL and the alternative scheme with low dose of antimony.
- Objectives. 3.1. General Objective. To compare the effectiveness and safety of 20 days of 20 mg/kg/day meglumine antimoniate with 30 days of 5 mg/kg/day meglumine antimoniate in the treatment of patients with CL. 3.2. Specific Objectives. 3.2.1. To evaluate non-inferiority of low dose group as compared to the high dose antimonial therapy for CL. 3.2.2. To compare the effectiveness immediately and up to two years after treatment, of the different groups of antimonial therapy for CL. 3.2.3. To compare the frequency and severity of clinical, laboratory and EKG adverse events between different antimonial treatment groups. 3.2.4. To compare the frequency and severity of adverse events between elderly and young people between the groups. 3.2.5. To compare the frequencies of epithelialization achieved on days 20, 30 and 50 of treatment in each patient. 3.2.6. To compare the time in days up to the epithelialization of the lesions according to location above and below the knees, controlling for concomitant vascular insufficiency.
- Subjects and methods.
- 1. Study design: Controlled clinical trial with standard treatment, randomized, single-blind, phase III.
4.2. Description of interventions: Meglumine antimoniate (Aventis, São Paulo, Brazil) is stored and ministered under actual conditions employed by the health services in Brazil. Each patient will be included in one of two treatment groups with meglumine antimoniate IM: a) 20 days of 20 mg/kg/day meglumine antimoniate, b) 30 days of 5 mg/kg/day meglumine antimoniate. There will be no cross-over between the groups for the purpose of this study. The data from those patients who require permanent discontinuation of a scheme will be assessed in the group that were randomized, ie, by modified intention to treat. Analysis will be performed by modified intention to treat and per protocol.
4.3. Sampling plan. 4.3.1 Sample size. The comparison of the effectiveness between the four schemes should reveal similar results for the following outcomes: a) frequency of good initial response; b) time (days) until the epithelialization of all lesions; c) time (days) to achieve the complete healing of all lesions; d) frequency of late response (two years of follow-up according to schedule); e) frequency of reactivation after treatment (up to 2 years of follow-up). With a significance level of 5% and 80% power to calculate the sample sizes to compare the groups; initially, a 60-total of patients will be required for non-inferiority analysis with a margin of 15%. For equivalence analysis, a 264-total of patients will be required.
4.4 Allocation strategy (randomization). Individuals eligible (see eligibility criteria) and who agree to participate (by signing an informed consent) will be randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups, according to order of arrival until the completion of the total groups.
4.5. Eligibility Criteria (see item: Eligibility Criteria). 4.6. Outcomes. 4.6.1 Effectiveness outcomes: Definition. a) Initial therapeutic response - presence or no of complete epithelialization of all lesions until day 110. b) Late therapeutic response - the presence or no of the following elements in the progression to healing: - disappearance of crusts until day 140; -disappearance of desquamation until day 230; - disappearance of infiltration until day 320; -disappearance of erythema until day 410; - no appearance of mucosal damage until day 770; - recurrence of any stage prior to that achieved and maintained in two observations with an interval of at least two weeks. 4.6.2 Safety outcomes (adverse events): definition, intensity and relationship to study drug. An adverse event (AE) is any effect, adverse or unexpected, evidenced by the investigator or reported by patients, beginning during the drug use or until 30 days after stopping it. The investigation of AE shall be made for both spontaneous recall and question by the physician according to a standardized form on days 10, 20, 30, 50, 60 and 80. The classification of the severity of adverse events (clinical, laboratory and electrocardiographic) will take place according to "AIDS Table for Grading Severity of Adult Adverse Experiences, 1992". The causal relationship to study drug (= AE) will be evaluated by the investigator and classified as follows: a) Definite (Highly Likely); b) Probable; c) Possible; d) Remote (Probably not); e) Definitely not.
4.7. Management of adverse effects. The AE will be noted in the appropriate form and shall contain: a description of the adverse effect, its intensity, relation with the investigated drug, start date, completion date, duration and conduct taken.
4.8. Masking. We chose to perform the measurements of outcomes of interest (effectiveness) and adverse events (clinical) by a physician who is not aware of what is the regimen used by the patient. It is intended to minimize measurement biases of the different outcomes according to treatment regimen to which each patient belongs. The results of laboratory tests are provided by the clinical pathology laboratory without information about the treatment group. The manager of database preserves the secrecy of this information by coding the groups for analysis for the epidemiologist(s).
4.9. Criteria for definitive discontinuation of study treatment: a) Interrupt driven by clinical, laboratory or EKG AE Grade 4; b) Interruption exceeding 10 days attributed to clinical, laboratory or EKG adverse event Grade <3; c) Spontaneous cessation of the use of prescribed medication beyond five consecutive doses, due to fault of the administration (noncompliance).
4.10. Criteria for study withdrawal: a) definitive interruption of treatment; b) Pregnancy; c) introduction of immunosuppressive drugs or potentially toxic; d) intercurrent disease, unrelated to study drug, but with demonstrations equivalent or superior to clinical grade 3 AE; e) poor initial or late therapeutic response; f) patient withdrawal to continue the study.
4.11. Procedures for confidentiality break. The randomization codes used for allocation of numbering and allocation of patients may be revealed in cases of necessity of the study.
4.12. Monitoring the study. The parameters (outcomes) of effectiveness and safety will be monitored according to the timetable for implementation. The principal investigator and coordinators will supervise the field work, controlling for quality deviation and this Protocol. Important items to be monitored: adhesion to the Protocol (follow-up losses will be minimized through active search), appropriate records of outcomes and adverse events; adequacy of stored products; quality of procedures for laboratory tests; minimization of missing data; periodic transmission of data for data entry. Written reports of field will be retained for consideration by the committees. Report of serious adverse events to the CEP/IPEC and decision to interrupt the test. External Committee: a committee of outside monitoring of the trial shall be constituted , consisting of three members, experts in the treatment of CL and execution of clinical trials. The committee will carry out audits of documentation and activities relevant to the clinical trial, controlling for possible protocol breaks.
4.13 Control of storage of medications. The ampoules required for complete treatment of the whole sample will be stored in the Pharmacy of IPEC. A trained team professional will include the patients, in day 1 consultation, following the randomization list.
4.14. Data Analysis Plan. Data analysis will be carried out following the principle of intention to treat. The data from those patients who require permanent discontinuation of a scheme will be analyzed according to the group for what they had been allocated initially, not being re-assigned to another group to resumption of treatment (no cross-over between the groups for the purpose of this study). We will describe the simple frequencies of categorical variables and measures of central tendency and dispersion of continuous quantitative variables for each antimony scheme. The proportion of dichotomous outcome of presence or absence of scarring in each group will be compared to the standard (chi-square) and through analysis of survival the time in days until reaching healing (log-rank statistic). The healing frequencies are compared by ratio test type chi-square, the median time to healing through comparison test of means (Student's t type) three or more (ANOVA) and survival analysis for outcomes that involve time in days, if necessary will be used nonparametric tests. To evaluate the efficacy and safety are also estimated the relative risk (RR) and the absolute risk reduction (ARR) and relative risk reduction (RRR). For paired comparison of proportions of healing on days 20, 30 and 50 will be employed the Mann-Whitney test 5. Ethical considerations. 6.1 Risks and benefits. The main potential benefit of this test is the possibility of subsidizing the use of lower doses of antimony, potentially less toxic and less costly. The risks consist of general adverse events, which will be thoroughly scrutinized and treated according to the schedule attached. This project was submitted to the Research Ethics Committee (CEP/IPEC) and CONEP. All patients sign an informed consent. This project follows the recommendations contained in the resolution 196/96 of the National Health Council.
5.2. Informed consent. In plain language and explaining the objectives, risks, benefits and identifying those responsible for research.
- Expected Results. We hope that low dose is non inferior to the high dose antimonial treatment and that the different schemes are equivalent in effectiveness, and with diverse toxicities.
- Financial support. This project is supported in part with funds approved by MCT/CNPq / MS-SCTIE-DECIT 25/2006.
- Conditions
- Cutaneous Leishmaniasis
- Being tested
- Meglumine antimoniate
- Keywords
- Leishmaniasis Cutaneous, Leishmania braziliensis, Meglumine Antimoniate, Treatment Effectiveness, Controlled Clinical Trials, Randomized
- Medical subject headings
- Leishmaniasis, Cutaneous
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Meglumine antimoniateDrug
Also called High dose, Low dose
Meglumine antimoniate is stored and ministered under actual conditions employed by health services in Brazil. Each patient will be included in one of the treatment groups with meglumine antimoniate IM:
High dose: 20 days of 20 mg/kg/day antimoniate meglumine. Low dose: 30 days of 5 mg/kg/day antimoniate meglumine.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| High dose | Active comparator | High dose: 20 days of 20 mg/kg/day meglumine antimoniate Receives: Drug: Meglumine antimoniate |
| Low dose | Experimental | Low dose: 30 days of 5 mg/kg/day meglumine antimoniate Receives: Drug: Meglumine antimoniate |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Effectiveness of meglumine antimoniate treatment
To compare the effectiveness of meglumine antimoniate at a dose of 5 mg or 20 mg Sb5+ / kg / day in the treatment of patients with cutaneous leishmaniasis.
Measured: 6 years
Secondary outcomes (1)
Safety of meglumine antimoniate treatment
To compare the safety of meglumine antimoniate at a dose of 5 mg or 20 mg Sb5+ / kg / day in the treatment of patients with cutaneous leishmaniasis.
Measured: 6 years
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted23 Feb 2011 (estimated)
- Study startOct 2008
- Primary completionApr 2016
- Study completionDec 2017
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (19)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Cutaneous LeishmaniasisStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
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 2/3
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Care provider
- Enrolment
- 72 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Oswaldo Cruz Foundation
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Rio de Janeiro State Research Supporting Foundation (FAPERJ), Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, ASchubach, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation
- Investigators
- Armando O. Schubach, MD, PhD, Study director, IPEC/FIOCRUZ
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01301924
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- StdvsaltCL
- Status last verified
- May 2018
- First submitted
- 20 Feb 2011
- Last updated
- 15 May 2018
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Antezana G, Zeballos R, Mendoza C, Lyevre P, Valda L, Cardenas F, Noriega I, Ugarte H, Dedet JP. Electrocardiographic alterations during treatment of mucocutaneous leishmaniasis with meglumine antimoniate and allopurinol. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 1992 Jan-Feb;86(1):31-3. doi: 10.1016/0035-9203(92)90427-e.
PubMed 1566297de Azeredo-Coutinho RB, Mendonca SC. An intermittent schedule is better than continuous regimen of antimonial therapy for cutaneous leishmaniasis in the municipality of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Rev Soc Bras Med Trop. 2002 Sep-Oct;35(5):477-81. doi: 10.1590/s0037-86822002000500009.
PubMed 12621667Chulay JD, Spencer HC, Mugambi M. Electrocardiographic changes during treatment of leishmaniasis with pentavalent antimony (sodium stibogluconate). Am J Trop Med Hyg. 1985 Jul;34(4):702-9. doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.1985.34.702.
PubMed 2992303Deps PD, Viana MC, Falqueto A, Dietze R. [Comparative assessment of the efficacy and toxicity of N-methyl-glucamine and BP88 sodium stibogluconate in the treatment of localized cutaneous leishmaniasis]. Rev Soc Bras Med Trop. 2000 Nov-Dec;33(6):535-43. doi: 10.1590/s0037-86822000000600004. Portuguese.
PubMed 11175583Hepburn NC, Nolan J, Fenn L, Herd RM, Neilson JM, Sutherland GR, Fox KA. Cardiac effects of sodium stibogluconate: myocardial, electrophysiological and biochemical studies. QJM. 1994 Aug;87(8):465-72.
PubMed 7922300Hepburn NC, Siddique I, Howie AF, Beckett GJ, Hayes PC. Hepatotoxicity of sodium stibogluconate therapy for American cutaneous leishmaniasis. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 1994 Jul-Aug;88(4):453-5. doi: 10.1016/0035-9203(94)90432-4.
PubMed 7570843Marzochi MC, Marzochi KB. Tegumentary and visceral leishmaniases in Brazil: emerging anthropozoonosis and possibilities for their control. Cad Saude Publica. 1994;10 Suppl 2:359-75. doi: 10.1590/s0102-311x1994000800014. Epub 2004 Mar 19.
PubMed 15042226McBride MO, Linney M, Davidson RN, Weber JN. Pancreatic necrosis following treatment of leishmaniasis with sodium stibogluconate. Clin Infect Dis. 1995 Sep;21(3):710. doi: 10.1093/clinids/21.3.710. No abstract available.
PubMed 8527590Oliveira Neto MP, Schubach A, Araujo ML, Pirmez C. High and low doses of antimony (Sbv) in American cutaneous leishmaniasis. A five years follow-up study of 15 patients. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz. 1996 Mar-Apr;91(2):207-9. doi: 10.1590/s0074-02761996000200016.
PubMed 8736092Oliveira-Neto MP, Schubach A, Mattos M, da Costa SC, Pirmez C. Intralesional therapy of American cutaneous leishmaniasis with pentavalent antimony in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil--an area of Leishmania (V.) braziliensis transmission. Int J Dermatol. 1997 Jun;36(6):463-8. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-4362.1997.00188.x.
PubMed 9248897Oliveira-Neto MP, Schubach A, Mattos M, Goncalves-Costa SC, Pirmez C. A low-dose antimony treatment in 159 patients with American cutaneous leishmaniasis: extensive follow-up studies (up to 10 years). Am J Trop Med Hyg. 1997 Dec;57(6):651-5. doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.1997.57.651.
PubMed 9430521Oliveira-Neto MP, Schubach A, Mattos M, Goncalves-Costa SC, Pirmez C. Treatment of American cutaneous leishmaniasis: a comparison between low dosage (5 mg/kg/day) and high dosage (20 mg/kg/day) antimony regimens. Pathol Biol (Paris). 1997 Jun;45(6):496-9.
PubMed 9309267Ribeiro AL, Drummond JB, Volpini AC, Andrade AC, Passos VM. Electrocardiographic changes during low-dose, short-term therapy of cutaneous leishmaniasis with the pentavalent antimonial meglumine. Braz J Med Biol Res. 1999 Mar;32(3):297-301. doi: 10.1590/s0100-879x1999000300008.
PubMed 10347787Rodrigues ML, Costa RS, Souza CS, Foss NT, Roselino AM. Nephrotoxicity attributed to meglumine antimoniate (Glucantime) in the treatment of generalized cutaneous leishmaniasis. Rev Inst Med Trop Sao Paulo. 1999 Jan-Feb;41(1):33-7. doi: 10.1590/s0036-46651999000100007.
PubMed 10436668Sampaio RN, de Paula CD, Sampaio JH, Furtado Rde S, Leal PP, Rosa TT, Rodrigues ME, Veiga JP. [The evaluation of the tolerance and nephrotoxicity of pentavalent antimony administered in a dose of 40 mg Sb V/kg/day, 12/12 hr, for 30 days in the mucocutaneous form of leishmaniasis]. Rev Soc Bras Med Trop. 1997 Nov-Dec;30(6):457-63. doi: 10.1590/s0037-86821997000600003. Portuguese.
PubMed 9463192
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 15 May 2018. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Phase III Clinical Trial for American Tegumentary Leishmaniasis: Comparison of Standard and Alternative Antimonial Dosage in Patients With American Cutaneous Leishmaniasis
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01301924
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- StdvsaltCL
- Conditions
- Cutaneous Leishmaniasis
- Keywords
- Leishmaniasis Cutaneous, Leishmania braziliensis, Meglumine Antimoniate, Treatment Effectiveness, Controlled Clinical Trials, Randomized
- Phase
- Phase 2/3
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 72 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Oswaldo Cruz FoundationUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Rio de Janeiro State Research Supporting Foundation (FAPERJ), Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
- Study start
- Oct 2008
- Primary completion
- Apr 2016 (actual)
- Study completion
- Dec 2017 (actual)
- First posted
- 23 Feb 2011 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
"Phase III Clinical Trial for American Tegumentary Leishmaniasis: Comparison of Standard and Alternative Antimonial Dosage in Patients With American Cutaneous Leishmaniasis " has begun in October 2008 at the Laboratory of Leishmaniasis Surveillance at Evandro Chagas Clinical Research Institute (IPEC), FIOCRUZ, aiming to compare efficacy and safety of the standard recommended schedule with an alternative dosage scheme of meglumine antimoniate in the treatment of American tegumentary leishmaniasis (ATL). It is a study with blind evaluation by the doctors and the responsible for statistical analysis. Patients diagnosed with ATL, eligible for the trial are randomly allocated into one of the schemes with meglumine antimoniate and monitored before, during and after it. There is no single regimen applicable to all forms of leishmaniasis around the world. Therapeutic regimens applied to treat people living in other geographic areas result in mixed outcomes. Ideally, the most appropriate regimens should be established for each endemic area, based on its efficacy, toxicity, difficulties of administration and cost. Given the problems and limitations of the use of pentavalent antimonials (Sb5+) at 20 mg Sb5+ / kg / day, less toxic alternative regimens, i.e. 5mg Sb5+/kg/day, deserve to be better evaluated. The treatment of ATL must heal skin lesions and prevent late mucosal lesion development. The indication of high doses of Sb5+ is based on the evidence that there could be induction of resistance with use of subdoses. However, clinical studies with extended follow-up in Rio de Janeiro have suggested that regular low doses (5mg Sb5+ / kg / day) may constitute an effective scheme, achieving cure rates similar to higher doses, with lower toxicity, ease of implementation and lower cost. Published studies on efficacy and safety of alternative dosage schemes with meglumine antimoniate failed to provide conclusive results so far, for various methodological biases. The need to compare the effectiveness and safety between the standard treatment scheme with meglumine antimoniate currently recommended in Brazil for the treatment of ATL and an alternative scheme with low doses of antimony is the motive for this study in Rio de Janeiro.
Detailed description
- Introduction. Pentavalent antimonials are first line drugs for the treatment of leishmaniasis. WHO and Brazilian Ministry of Health recommend treating patients with cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) with doses of 20mg/kg/day, IM or IV, for three to four weeks. In the Reference Centre on Leishmaniasis - IPEC - FIOCRUZ, the dose of 5mg/kg/day IM has been effective and well tolerated in the treatment of CL. CL is treated for 30 days, with a lower incidence of adverse effects and lower treatment dropout rates. In all cases patients should be monitored with clinical examination, electrocardiogram (EKG), blood count, liver, renal and pancreatic function tests. Some side effects can be observed, although they not necessarily lead to discontinuation of treatment. EKG most frequent abnormalities are heart rhythm and disturbances of ventricular repolarization: flattening or inversion of T wave and adjusted QT space widening.
- Background: Ideally, the most appropriate antimoniate therapeutic regimens should be established for each area, based on their efficacy and toxicity, without ignoring the difficulties of administration and cost. The treatment of CL must achieve healing of skin lesions and prevention of late mucosal involvement. The recognition, recommendation and acceptance of new regimens should be preceded by demonstration of their superiority to currently recommended treatments. We aim to compare the effectiveness and safety among treatment schemes with meglumine antimoniate currently recommended in Brazil for the treatment of CL and the alternative scheme with low dose of antimony.
- Objectives. 3.1. General Objective. To compare the effectiveness and safety of 20 days of 20 mg/kg/day meglumine antimoniate with 30 days of 5 mg/kg/day meglumine antimoniate in the treatment of patients with CL. 3.2. Specific Objectives. 3.2.1. To evaluate non-inferiority of low dose group as compared to the high dose antimonial therapy for CL. 3.2.2. To compare the effectiveness immediately and up to two years after treatment, of the different groups of antimonial therapy for CL. 3.2.3. To compare the frequency and severity of clinical, laboratory and EKG adverse events between different antimonial treatment groups. 3.2.4. To compare the frequency and severity of adverse events between elderly and young people between the groups. 3.2.5. To compare the frequencies of epithelialization achieved on days 20, 30 and 50 of treatment in each patient. 3.2.6. To compare the time in days up to the epithelialization of the lesions according to location above and below the knees, controlling for concomitant vascular insufficiency.
- Subjects and methods.
- 1. Study design: Controlled clinical trial with standard treatment, randomized, single-blind, phase III.
4.2. Description of interventions: Meglumine antimoniate (Aventis, São Paulo, Brazil) is stored and ministered under actual conditions employed by the health services in Brazil. Each patient will be included in one of two treatment groups with meglumine antimoniate IM: a) 20 days of 20 mg/kg/day meglumine antimoniate, b) 30 days of 5 mg/kg/day meglumine antimoniate. There will be no cross-over between the groups for the purpose of this study. The data from those patients who require permanent discontinuation of a scheme will be assessed in the group that were randomized, ie, by modified intention to treat. Analysis will be performed by modified intention to treat and per protocol.
4.3. Sampling plan. 4.3.1 Sample size. The comparison of the effectiveness between the four schemes should reveal similar results for the following outcomes: a) frequency of good initial response; b) time (days) until the epithelialization of all lesions; c) time (days) to achieve the complete healing of all lesions; d) frequency of late response (two years of follow-up according to schedule); e) frequency of reactivation after treatment (up to 2 years of follow-up). With a significance level of 5% and 80% power to calculate the sample sizes to compare the groups; initially, a 60-total of patients will be required for non-inferiority analysis with a margin of 15%. For equivalence analysis, a 264-total of patients will be required.
4.4 Allocation strategy (randomization). Individuals eligible (see eligibility criteria) and who agree to participate (by signing an informed consent) will be randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups, according to order of arrival until the completion of the total groups.
4.5. Eligibility Criteria (see item: Eligibility Criteria). 4.6. Outcomes. 4.6.1 Effectiveness outcomes: Definition. a) Initial therapeutic response - presence or no of complete epithelialization of all lesions until day 110. b) Late therapeutic response - the presence or no of the following elements in the progression to healing: - disappearance of crusts until day 140; -disappearance of desquamation until day 230; - disappearance of infiltration until day 320; -disappearance of erythema until day 410; - no appearance of mucosal damage until day 770; - recurrence of any stage prior to that achieved and maintained in two observations with an interval of at least two weeks. 4.6.2 Safety outcomes (adverse events): definition, intensity and relationship to study drug. An adverse event (AE) is any effect, adverse or unexpected, evidenced by the investigator or reported by patients, beginning during the drug use or until 30 days after stopping it. The investigation of AE shall be made for both spontaneous recall and question by the physician according to a standardized form on days 10, 20, 30, 50, 60 and 80. The classification of the severity of adverse events (clinical, laboratory and electrocardiographic) will take place according to "AIDS Table for Grading Severity of Adult Adverse Experiences, 1992". The causal relationship to study drug (= AE) will be evaluated by the investigator and classified as follows: a) Definite (Highly Likely); b) Probable; c) Possible; d) Remote (Probably not); e) Definitely not.
4.7. Management of adverse effects. The AE will be noted in the appropriate form and shall contain: a description of the adverse effect, its intensity, relation with the investigated drug, start date, completion date, duration and conduct taken.
4.8. Masking. We chose to perform the measurements of outcomes of interest (effectiveness) and adverse events (clinical) by a physician who is not aware of what is the regimen used by the patient. It is intended to minimize measurement biases of the different outcomes according to treatment regimen to which each patient belongs. The results of laboratory tests are provided by the clinical pathology laboratory without information about the treatment group. The manager of database preserves the secrecy of this information by coding the groups for analysis for the epidemiologist(s).
4.9. Criteria for definitive discontinuation of study treatment: a) Interrupt driven by clinical, laboratory or EKG AE Grade 4; b) Interruption exceeding 10 days attributed to clinical, laboratory or EKG adverse event Grade <3; c) Spontaneous cessation of the use of prescribed medication beyond five consecutive doses, due to fault of the administration (noncompliance).
4.10. Criteria for study withdrawal: a) definitive interruption of treatment; b) Pregnancy; c) introduction of immunosuppressive drugs or potentially toxic; d) intercurrent disease, unrelated to study drug, but with demonstrations equivalent or superior to clinical grade 3 AE; e) poor initial or late therapeutic response; f) patient withdrawal to continue the study.
4.11. Procedures for confidentiality break. The randomization codes used for allocation of numbering and allocation of patients may be revealed in cases of necessity of the study.
4.12. Monitoring the study. The parameters (outcomes) of effectiveness and safety will be monitored according to the timetable for implementation. The principal investigator and coordinators will supervise the field work, controlling for quality deviation and this Protocol. Important items to be monitored: adhesion to the Protocol (follow-up losses will be minimized through active search), appropriate records of outcomes and adverse events; adequacy of stored products; quality of procedures for laboratory tests; minimization of missing data; periodic transmission of data for data entry. Written reports of field will be retained for consideration by the committees. Report of serious adverse events to the CEP/IPEC and decision to interrupt the test. External Committee: a committee of outside monitoring of the trial shall be constituted , consisting of three members, experts in the treatment of CL and execution of clinical trials. The committee will carry out audits of documentation and activities relevant to the clinical trial, controlling for possible protocol breaks.
4.13 Control of storage of medications. The ampoules required for complete treatment of the whole sample will be stored in the Pharmacy of IPEC. A trained team professional will include the patients, in day 1 consultation, following the randomization list.
4.14. Data Analysis Plan. Data analysis will be carried out following the principle of intention to treat. The data from those patients who require permanent discontinuation of a scheme will be analyzed according to the group for what they had been allocated initially, not being re-assigned to another group to resumption of treatment (no cross-over between the groups for the purpose of this study). We will describe the simple frequencies of categorical variables and measures of central tendency and dispersion of continuous quantitative variables for each antimony scheme. The proportion of dichotomous outcome of presence or absence of scarring in each group will be compared to the standard (chi-square) and through analysis of survival the time in days until reaching healing (log-rank statistic). The healing frequencies are compared by ratio test type chi-square, the median time to healing through comparison test of means (Student's t type) three or more (ANOVA) and survival analysis for outcomes that involve time in days, if necessary will be used nonparametric tests. To evaluate the efficacy and safety are also estimated the relative risk (RR) and the absolute risk reduction (ARR) and relative risk reduction (RRR). For paired comparison of proportions of healing on days 20, 30 and 50 will be employed the Mann-Whitney test 5. Ethical considerations. 6.1 Risks and benefits. The main potential benefit of this test is the possibility of subsidizing the use of lower doses of antimony, potentially less toxic and less costly. The risks consist of general adverse events, which will be thoroughly scrutinized and treated according to the schedule attached. This project was submitted to the Research Ethics Committee (CEP/IPEC) and CONEP. All patients sign an informed consent. This project follows the recommendations contained in the resolution 196/96 of the National Health Council.
5.2. Informed consent. In plain language and explaining the objectives, risks, benefits and identifying those responsible for research.
- Expected Results. We hope that low dose is non inferior to the high dose antimonial treatment and that the different schemes are equivalent in effectiveness, and with diverse toxicities.
- Financial support. This project is supported in part with funds approved by MCT/CNPq / MS-SCTIE-DECIT 25/2006.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (care provider)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| High dose | Active comparator | Drug: Meglumine antimoniateHigh dose: 20 days of 20 mg/kg/day meglumine antimoniate |
| Low dose | Experimental | Drug: Meglumine antimoniateLow dose: 30 days of 5 mg/kg/day meglumine antimoniate |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 13 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Cutaneous leishmaniasis with parasitological diagnosis by one or more of the following methods: direct examination (scraping or imprint), histopathology, culture, immunohistochemistry, or PCR.
- History of exposure in an endemic area of Rio de Janeiro
- Absence of prior treatment with meglumine antimoniate
Key exclusion criteria (8 listed)
- women who do not use contraceptives or do it inadequately
- pregnant
- under 13
- prior treatment with meglumine antimoniate
- use of immunosuppressive therapy (steroids, cancer chemotherapy) or medicines for tuberculosis or leprosy.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Meglumine antimoniateAlso: High dose, Low doseMeglumine antimoniate is stored and ministered under actual conditions employed by health services in Brazil. Each patient will be included in one of the treatment groups with meglumine antimoniate IM: High dose: 20 days of 20 mg/kg/day antimoniate meglumine. Low dose: 30 days of 5 mg/kg/day antimoniate meglumine. | Drug | High dose, Low dose |
Primary outcome
Effectiveness of meglumine antimoniate treatment
Time frame: 6 years
To compare the effectiveness of meglumine antimoniate at a dose of 5 mg or 20 mg Sb5+ / kg / day in the treatment of patients with cutaneous leishmaniasis.
1 secondary outcome
Safety of meglumine antimoniate treatment
Time frame: 6 years
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 15 May 2018.
- Background: PubMed 1566297Antezana G, Zeballos R, Mendoza C, Lyevre P, Valda L, Cardenas F, Noriega I, Ugarte H, Dedet JP. Electrocardiographic alterations during treatment of mucocutaneous leishmaniasis with meglumine antimoniate and allopurinol. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 1992 Jan-Feb;86(1):31-3. doi: 10.1016/0035-9203(92)90427-e.
- Background: PubMed 12621667de Azeredo-Coutinho RB, Mendonca SC. An intermittent schedule is better than continuous regimen of antimonial therapy for cutaneous leishmaniasis in the municipality of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Rev Soc Bras Med Trop. 2002 Sep-Oct;35(5):477-81. doi: 10.1590/s0037-86822002000500009.
- Background: PubMed 2992303Chulay JD, Spencer HC, Mugambi M. Electrocardiographic changes during treatment of leishmaniasis with pentavalent antimony (sodium stibogluconate). Am J Trop Med Hyg. 1985 Jul;34(4):702-9. doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.1985.34.702.
- Background: PubMed 11175583Deps PD, Viana MC, Falqueto A, Dietze R. [Comparative assessment of the efficacy and toxicity of N-methyl-glucamine and BP88 sodium stibogluconate in the treatment of localized cutaneous leishmaniasis]. Rev Soc Bras Med Trop. 2000 Nov-Dec;33(6):535-43. doi: 10.1590/s0037-86822000000600004. Portuguese.
- Background: PubMed 7922300Hepburn NC, Nolan J, Fenn L, Herd RM, Neilson JM, Sutherland GR, Fox KA. Cardiac effects of sodium stibogluconate: myocardial, electrophysiological and biochemical studies. QJM. 1994 Aug;87(8):465-72.
- Background: PubMed 7570843Hepburn NC, Siddique I, Howie AF, Beckett GJ, Hayes PC. Hepatotoxicity of sodium stibogluconate therapy for American cutaneous leishmaniasis. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 1994 Jul-Aug;88(4):453-5. doi: 10.1016/0035-9203(94)90432-4.
- Background: PubMed 15042226Marzochi MC, Marzochi KB. Tegumentary and visceral leishmaniases in Brazil: emerging anthropozoonosis and possibilities for their control. Cad Saude Publica. 1994;10 Suppl 2:359-75. doi: 10.1590/s0102-311x1994000800014. Epub 2004 Mar 19.
- Background: PubMed 8527590McBride MO, Linney M, Davidson RN, Weber JN. Pancreatic necrosis following treatment of leishmaniasis with sodium stibogluconate. Clin Infect Dis. 1995 Sep;21(3):710. doi: 10.1093/clinids/21.3.710. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 8736092Oliveira Neto MP, Schubach A, Araujo ML, Pirmez C. High and low doses of antimony (Sbv) in American cutaneous leishmaniasis. A five years follow-up study of 15 patients. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz. 1996 Mar-Apr;91(2):207-9. doi: 10.1590/s0074-02761996000200016.
- Background: PubMed 9248897Oliveira-Neto MP, Schubach A, Mattos M, da Costa SC, Pirmez C. Intralesional therapy of American cutaneous leishmaniasis with pentavalent antimony in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil--an area of Leishmania (V.) braziliensis transmission. Int J Dermatol. 1997 Jun;36(6):463-8. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-4362.1997.00188.x.
- Background: PubMed 9430521Oliveira-Neto MP, Schubach A, Mattos M, Goncalves-Costa SC, Pirmez C. A low-dose antimony treatment in 159 patients with American cutaneous leishmaniasis: extensive follow-up studies (up to 10 years). Am J Trop Med Hyg. 1997 Dec;57(6):651-5. doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.1997.57.651.
- Background: PubMed 9309267Oliveira-Neto MP, Schubach A, Mattos M, Goncalves-Costa SC, Pirmez C. Treatment of American cutaneous leishmaniasis: a comparison between low dosage (5 mg/kg/day) and high dosage (20 mg/kg/day) antimony regimens. Pathol Biol (Paris). 1997 Jun;45(6):496-9.
- Oswaldo Cruz Foundation is responsible for a range of activities which include research development; production of vaccines, drugs, reagents, etc; quality control of products and services; education and the implementation of social programs.Link provided by the sponsor.
- Evandro Chagas Clinical Research Institute (IPEC), FIOCRUZLink provided by the sponsor.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Cutaneous Leishmaniasis
RecruitingObservational study
Diagnosis and Treatment of Leishmania Infections
Kinetoplastid, Skin Diseases, Parasitic
Recruiting
Feasibility of Integrating Thermotherapy for Treatment of Cutaneous Leishmaniasis in Primary Health Care Setup
Cutaneous Leishmaniasis
Not yet recruiting
Immersive Technology Headsets to Reduce Procedural Pain and Anxiety: Feasibility and Effects in Cutaneous Leishmaniasis Patients in Pakistan
Cutaneous Leishmaniasis, Pain
RecruitingObservational study
Ex Vivo Immunogenicity Screening of Vaccine Candidate Antigen Combinations in Ethiopian Patients With Leishmaniasis
Leishmaniasis, Cutaneous, Leishmaniasis
Not yet recruitingPhase 2
Comparison of Intralesional Glucantime With and Without Fractional CO₂ Laser in Adults With Cutaneous Leishmaniasis
Cutaneous Leishminiasis
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Armando O. Schubach, MD, PhD study director
IPEC/FIOCRUZ
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 2/3 study testing Meglumine antimoniate in people with Cutaneous Leishmaniasis, run by Oswaldo Cruz Foundation at 1 site in Brazil.
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 3 inclusion and 8 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 15 May 2018. 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 Brazil. 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.
What does this combined phase mean?
Phase 2 studies give the treatment to a larger group to see whether it has the intended effect and to keep checking safety.
Phase 3 studies compare the treatment with the current standard treatment or a placebo in a large group, to confirm how well it works and watch for side effects.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
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?
Effectiveness of meglumine antimoniate treatment (time frame: 6 years). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT01301924, which also lists 19 linked publications.
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 15 May 2018.